| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | Add "degree of nativeness" to the native language search Thread poster: Samuel Murray
|
|---|
Kay Denney 
France
Local time: 11:59
French to English
| thanks dianaft for that clarification | Jan 7, 2014 |
however I don't agree with you. I have actually read the entire thread, and the entire other thread this is a spin-off of.
feelings are always justified, even when you get your period the next day and realise you were overreacting to something the day before. Because if you feel less strongly the next day, it may in part be because you finally managed to let off steam the day before! And those feelings may have been repressed for a while too.
I do feel very strongly that peop... See more however I don't agree with you. I have actually read the entire thread, and the entire other thread this is a spin-off of.
feelings are always justified, even when you get your period the next day and realise you were overreacting to something the day before. Because if you feel less strongly the next day, it may in part be because you finally managed to let off steam the day before! And those feelings may have been repressed for a while too.
I do feel very strongly that people should not be lying about their native language(s) in order to get work. Especially given that the type of work I do depends very much on being able to express yourself naturally, which is the preserve of good translators working into their native tongue. The number of times I've been asked to clean up some drivel produced by a non-native, like the brother in law of the client's secretary who thinks his English is great because he worked in a London pub for six months just doesn't bear thinking about.
Phil Hand wrote: dianaft wrote:
Not everyone who states nativeness in 2 languages does this to "distort" the market. Sometimes it comes from a very simple desire to give a faithful answer. Diana, I think you've misread the opinions of people commenting on the nativeness issue. I can't remember every post, of course, but as I recall most people had no problem with the idea that one can have two native languages. The objection was to individuals who claim as native languages in which they are clearly not competent. As far as I'm concerned, having two native languages is perfectly natural, and I would expect it to be relatively common among translators.
Yes exactly. We're not quibbling about your right to say you are a native English speaker - your English is perfectly readable. Not the case of everyone here.
And I agree that it will be increasingly difficult to determine nativeness! ▲ Collapse
| | | |
I've seen 'near-native' in some classification scales, which could probably be used to avoid unfairly disadvantaging people who aren't technically native but you won't tell from their writing or speech. To put them in the same basket with all the other advanced and proficient learners could be unfair, especially if they are, say, professional linguists, bidirectional translators with 20 years of experience, professionals practicing in a non-native language and so on, which is different from just... See more I've seen 'near-native' in some classification scales, which could probably be used to avoid unfairly disadvantaging people who aren't technically native but you won't tell from their writing or speech. To put them in the same basket with all the other advanced and proficient learners could be unfair, especially if they are, say, professional linguists, bidirectional translators with 20 years of experience, professionals practicing in a non-native language and so on, which is different from just passing a C2 examination.
Then, I guess, there are the problems of bilinguals and multilinguals who don't get to use all of their languages too often and may therefore shy away from claiming nativeness in any other than their primary language. It's probably not quite fair to lump them with learners, erratic or rusty as they may be. They didn't really learn the language the same way foreign students do anyway, they soaked it up as kids.
What I'm afraid of, though, in the event of any official relaxation of the native standard (introducing acceptable lower grades will by definition require a relaxed standard to be found), is a huge wave of 'native speakers' of English I really wouldn't like to proofread... or be proofread by.
There are controversial native speakers and really native-like foreigners in any language (even Polish!), what with non-metropolitan French and German etc., but English is a class unto itself here. Being native in it is a job getting and rank pulling instrument that can be annoying in the hands of someone who meets the qualifications on paper but isn't quite there in practical terms.
[Edited at 2014-01-07 23:41 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | It's nice to see... | Jan 8, 2014 |
It's nice to see that at least some people here are honest.
Why do so many non-natives feel the need to claim EN as their native language? Who are they trying to fool? Do they think no one notices?
Does anyone else care?
Maybe off-topic.
Cilian (native EN, pretty good DE)
| | | | Kay Denney
France
Local time: 11:59
French to English
| The sort of thing that makes me mad: | Jan 8, 2014 |
When working in a language school I once refused to interview a woman applying for a job as a native-speaking English teacher who claimed to "speak very well English because I teached in New York"
I'm not exaggerating. Wish I were.
| | |
|
|
|
Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 10:59
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| Strange who claims EN as a native language | Jan 8, 2014 |
Cilian O'Tuama wrote:
It's nice to see that at least some people here are honest.
Some of the very best non-native speakers (and writers) of English here are also those who have never stated they are native speakers, but rather extremely proficient ones. Could it be that they are also the ones who have no trouble finding work and therefore have no need to lie in order to be eligible for as many publicly posted jobs as possible on ProZ.com?
Who are they trying to fool? Do they think no one notices?
Does anyone else care?
I care very much, Cilian, but not for the reason they would jump to. I'm not in the slightest bit worried about their competition; for a marketing and tourism specialist, that would be particularly ridiculous. But I do care about the industry as a whole, and I do care about the reputation of translators in general - being one of them I feel I have to care. When I see someone struggling with simple sentences yet claiming to be a native speaker able to translate anything into English (or teach English), then I feel ashamed on their behalf and deeply sorry for the client (or the student).
| | | | Rachel Fell
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:59
French to English
+ ...
Cilian O'Tuama wrote:
Why do so many non-natives feel the need to claim EN as their native language? Who are they trying to fool? Do they think no one notices?
Does anyone else care?
- they certainly do!
| | | | Lincoln Hui
Hong Kong
Local time: 17:59
Member
Chinese to English
+ ...
| Treating the fever rather than the flu | Jan 9, 2014 |
I care very much, Cilian, but not for the reason they would jump to. I'm not in the slightest bit worried about their competition; for a marketing and tourism specialist, that would be particularly ridiculous. But I do care about the industry as a whole, and I do care about the reputation of translators in general - being one of them I feel I have to care. When I see someone struggling with simple sentences yet claiming to be a native speaker able to translate anything into English (or teach English), then I feel ashamed on their behalf and deeply sorry for the client (or the student).
That has nothing to do with them claiming nativeness or not. That simply has to do with them being bad translators who don't have a good grasp on their own ability level, and whether they declare themselves as native English speakers or not will not change the fact that they are bad translators.
If someone struggles with simple sentences, why would you even trust them to translate from that language? I can tell you that I've had to proofread Chinese > English materials where the translator's understanding of Chinese was questionable, and that's putting it kindly.
[Edited at 2014-01-09 06:20 GMT]
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 10:59
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| The words in bold sum up this post | Jan 9, 2014 |
Lincoln Hui wrote:
That has nothing to do with them claiming nativeness or not. That simply has to do with them being bad translators who don't have a good grasp on their own ability level, and whether they declare themselves as native English speakers or not will not change the fact that they are bad translators.
Certainly, bad translators will deliver bad translations, and they may or may not be delusional about their ability (some may actually believe they're as good as any native speaker), but for many it's just a plain lie. The claim should stand for absolute proof of a grasp of the basic structure of the language at the very least (yes, I accept there are native speakers who struggle with the written language). In a professional linguist's profile, surely it should stand for a complete grasp of the language.
If someone struggles with simple sentences, why would you even trust them to translate from that language?
Why suppose that our clients are in any position to determine linguistic abilities? If you work exclusively with large agencies then that might be the case, but personally I work mainly with small agencies and with direct clients (e.g. a small Russian agency needing English proofreading, or a French business needing an English website). Often, their grasp of English is limited - that's why they need me! They take the facts I present in my profile and CV as the truth. Clients trust us not to lie.
I can tell you that I've had to proofread Chinese > English materials where the translator's understanding of Chinese was questionable, and that's putting it kindly.
As you say, "that simply has to do with them being bad translators who don't have a good grasp on their own ability level". Well, not necessarily bad translators but certainly tackling a translation they aren't qualified to handle. There was no lie involved: it was a case of over-confidence or disregard for quality.
I find it exasperating to be associated with so many peers who have such scant regard for quality. Most of them never contribute to forum threads, by the way. But I find it totally and utterly unacceptable to be associated with liars.
| | |
|
|
|
Kay Denney
France
Local time: 11:59
French to English
agree with Sheila here!
Just struggling with the revision of a text where readers are advised that if they get *burnt* by hot water they need to let a *soup spoon* of sugar *melt* in their mouth. The PM promised me it was a native speaker, I'm wondering if it was a human being.
| | | | Lincoln Hui
Hong Kong
Local time: 17:59
Member
Chinese to English
+ ...
| Define native | Jan 9, 2014 |
The claim should stand for absolute proof of a grasp of the basic structure of the language at the very least (yes, I accept there are native speakers who struggle with the written language). In a professional linguist's profile, surely it should stand for a complete grasp of the language.
If that was a definition that could be agreed upon, I would hardly have bothered myself with argument. But the fact is there are some very vocal individuals who hold a much more rigid definition of "native" and have expressed it openly.
| | | |
Lincoln Hui wrote:
Define native
The archetypal native speaker speaks a language as his first, primary and dominant language. By extension it's hard to deny nativeness to bilinguals and childhood immigrants or expats from a young age, who may actually be rusty and have some foreign influence (even locally based interpreters have foreign accents).
But, someone who took a degree or served a tour and then went back to live in his home country ever after is not a native speaker. I would include adult learners who have gone grey speaking the language, as long as they are not distinguishable from second-generation immigrants, simply because there's no better bracket for them, and I guess at that point they've earned their nativeness. But native speaker is not a proficiency level. It's possible to be more proficient (speak or write more correctly and have a better style) than most native speakers without being one.
| | | |
Sheila Wilson wrote:
But I find it totally and utterly unacceptable to be associated with liars.
I agree, but that seems to leave only one option, doesn't it?
| | |
|
|
|
Diana Obermeyer
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:59
Member (2013)
German to English
+ ...
Łukasz Gos-Furmankiewicz wrote: Lincoln Hui wrote:
Define native The archetypal native speaker speaks a language as his first, primary and dominant language. By extension it's hard to deny nativeness to bilinguals and childhood immigrants or expats from a young age, who may actually be rusty and have some foreign influence (even locally based interpreters have foreign accents). But, someone who took a degree or served a tour and then went back to live in his home country ever after is not a native speaker. I would include adult learners who have gone grey speaking the language, as long as they are not distinguishable from second-generation immigrants, simply because there's no better bracket for them, and I guess at that point they've earned their nativeness. But native speaker is not a proficiency level. It's possible to be more proficient (speak or write more correctly and have a better style) than most native speakers without being one.
"But native speaker is not a proficiency level."
And I think that this is exactly the problem here - it is treated as if it were a profiency level. Nativeness and profiency are two separate things. Yet, because some (many) do assimilate them, a conflict arises.
With respect to translation, no degree of nativeness can ever replace specialist knowledge. For instance, I don't understand medical documents in either language. Sure, I can look up every abbreviation and proper name of a condition, but nativeness doesn't qualify me to touch such a document. I would consider it far more logical to see "medical training/education" as a qualification criterion than nativeness - after all, nobody speaks that way in everyday life.
That is maybe an extreme example, but it does apply to most fields.
Nativeness doesn't mean that one is suited to the particular style of a given text or that one even understands the terminology and it certainly doesn't mean that one is able to transfer that style and terminology accurately.
It simply means that due to having been immersed in a language for a large part of one's life and from an early age onwards, the language comes naturally, one thinks in that language and one has a more pronounced feeling for what sounds right.
To actually equate nativeness with writing profiency would disqualify more than half of the world's population of nativeness in any language.
[Edited at 2014-01-10 06:16 GMT]
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 17:59
Chinese to English
| Separate but related | Jan 10, 2014 |
dianaft wrote:
"But native speaker is not a proficiency level."
And I think that this is exactly the problem here - it is treated as if it were a profiency level. Nativeness and profiency are two separate things.
This is correct, of course. But it's not a simple black/white issue. It is not the case that nativeness is not the same as proficiency, therefore nativeness is unrelated to proficiency. The relationship between nativeness and proficiency is a subtle one.
First, the number of non-natives who achieve the level of linguistic control required to be a translator is tiny. We are not just workers in our native language, we are *professional writers* in our target languages. Unless you're Beckett or Nabokov, you're just not that good in a non-native language. In the long thread I wrote a post summing up the difference between my second language and native competence:
I think I can write a "perfect" translation into Chinese - i.e. a translation with no language errors which accurately reflects the meaning of the original. I've put perfect in scare quotes there because, of course, no translation is ever perfect. I'm using it here to mean "has no problems which can be unequivocally defined as errors". Problems: I can't necessarily control perfectly for tone and register in the way that a native can; I can't innovate in Chinese in the way that a native can. It takes me much longer to achieve quality Chinese output than it does a Chinese native. And I cannot act as my own quality control in Chinese, in the way that I can in English. As such, my Chinese is always a subset of Chinese: that part of Chinese that I've learned and can check. http://www.proz.com/forum/prozcom_suggestions/227485-should_“native_language”_claims_be_verified-page157.html
It's not impossible to translate into L2 - I've certainly done it - but it's harder, takes longer, and requires more checking. Therefore it's not *best practice*. That's not to say it should never happen - subject knowledge could be a more important consideration for a specific job. But *all other things being equal* it makes sense to use a target native translator.
Secondly, the question of proficiency is actually congingent on the concept of nativeness. A proficient writer in German is one who writes in a way that native Germans find easy to understand. There is really no other definition. No grammar authority can define what German is. It is nothing more or less than the language which Germans speak.
(Of course it's not quite that simple - there are issues of standardisation across regions and the difference between written and spoken language, not to mention all the questions of status dialects...)
Yet, because some (many) do assimilate them, a conflict arises.
There are ways in which the two concepts *should* be related. There are many English speakers who are not native English speakers, and we rightly recognise them as such based on their proficiency. Certain kinds of proficiency are an easy and accurate indicator of whether a person is *not native* - though they cannot tell you whether a person *is native* or a highly proficient speaker of L2.
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:59
Portuguese to English
+ ...
| Linguists vs subject specialists | Jan 10, 2014 |
We assume that we are all on this site because our common denominator is that we are translators, who have come to this profession from a linguistic background and thereafter acquired and built on our specialisations. However, as sections of the industry develop and move towards increased specialisation, I see changes taking place. The translation industry is no longer just made up of traditional linguists, but of subject specialists who have come to the profession with knowledge of other langua... See more We assume that we are all on this site because our common denominator is that we are translators, who have come to this profession from a linguistic background and thereafter acquired and built on our specialisations. However, as sections of the industry develop and move towards increased specialisation, I see changes taking place. The translation industry is no longer just made up of traditional linguists, but of subject specialists who have come to the profession with knowledge of other languages. In some subject areas, the focus would appear to be moving away from language proficiency and towards subject knowledge. I believe this partly explains the disparity between opinions on language proficiency and the importance of native speakers. I don’t deny that there are still bare-faced liars out there though
I don’t see these heated discussions taking place in the forums of professional translators’ associations, which are still by and large made up of people who are first and foremost linguists. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | 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 | 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! » |
| | 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 
