12:11 May 11, 2011 

Besides 'observed' there is an, in my opinion entirely different meaning of 'gezien' that I would not see as just a different flavor. 'Geziene techniek' could also mean 'in high standing'. It has some of your 'recognised' or 'approved' in it, but it definitely means more than that. A typical example is 'een geziene gast' - someone who is 'graag gezien'. I thought you were thinking of this meaning, besides 'observed'. There is nothing 'recognised' or 'approved' intended in the source with 'geziene techniek', if you ask me. They are quite two entirely different meanings.

08:07 May 11, 2011 

Hi, Dave. The text you are quoting is my paraphrase, not the source text. The whole translation is about a course in which trainees are taught various techniques. The first stage in the teaching is to demonstrate the techniques so the trainees can see how they are carried out. Next they have to practise them at home and then finally, optionally, they can attend the training centre for an extended period in order to perfect these techniques. So as I see it, the "viewing" is the first stage in the learning. What I was trying to clarify was whether the term "gezien" carried any extra flavour of the techniques that are demonstrated being "recognised", "approved" or "standardised" over and above the meaning of their being observed or viewed. Both Lianne and Ron have clarified this, I think.

07:49 May 11, 2011 

Quote from below: "the trainees attend a basic training course where they are taught various techniques and are meant to practise the "geziene technieken" at home." They have been "taught" the various techniques. So they have presumably "learned" the various techniques.

07:27 May 11, 2011 

That your mother asked you 'what did you learn at school?' does not mean that in this context 'techniques learned' should be used. I believe that the source specifically refers to techniques that have been shown, and not 'just' taught.

16:09 May 10, 2011 

A number of permanent relationships with clients originated through either helping someone out who got into a fix with a deadline and needed an assist or through clubbing together with other translators with a PM to take on a big job which is simply too huge to undertake on one's own. That then tends to lead on to further work with the same people if you get on well with them. I guess you don't have to be a Proz member to do that, but I suspect you get more invitations for that sort of thing if you are.

16:09 May 10, 2011 

Unless you're as poor as a church mouse with a big tax bill, it's no money really. I got mine back within 3 days.

16:03 May 10, 2011 

I was a member until recently, but that was mainly because I thought ProZ was worth paying for rather than because there are any tangible benefits. You can bid for jobs, but they're either badly paid or they don't reply.

15:57 May 10, 2011 

I'll drink to that! More than worth while!

15:56 May 10, 2011 

I'd rather include as many good translators as possible than exclude as many bad ones as possible!

15:51 May 10, 2011 

Because you have learned a technique, it does not follow that you have mastered it. About half a century ago, my mum often asked me "what did you learn at school today son?" she never ever asked "what did you see at school today son?" Get my point?

15:50 May 10, 2011 

Not that I'm trying to tell you what to do but - why on earth have you still not joined Proz? I have found it to be very much worth my while to be a member and have earned back my membership fee many times over. So I'm definitely a Proz fan and can heartily recommend it.

15:43 May 10, 2011 

Thanks for your input so far. Phil, don't be miffed. You've been on Kudoz long and frequently enough to rate as a Proz member for my purposes. In designating the preference, I was just trying to avoid too much input from really inexperienced translators. I am going to wait 24 hrs as required by the book to grade the response to this. Whilst I agree with your sentiments, the context makes it clear that the trainees have not yet mastered these techniques although they have viewed them or observed them or had them demonstrated. The passage is saying that they will now have to practise these techniques at home and in the following extended period at the training centre with the object of mastering them. So in the present context, the techniques have not yet been thoroughly learned at this stage.

15:15 May 10, 2011 

If I was having a heart transplant I would rather have it carried out by someone that has learned the technique rather than by someone that has simply viewed it. This is where things really do get lost in translation - or is it the other way around?:-))

15:07 May 10, 2011 

so I'm not allowed to answer this question, being an inferior translator, but I'm a native ENGLISH speaker and I agree with Dave. :-)

09:20 May 10, 2011 

They have been shown the techniques for one purpose - to learn them.
You could also say "the techniques demonstrated", but why not say the "techniques learned"? Just because you have learned a technique, it does not mean that you don't need to practice it.

08:57 May 10, 2011 

The expression appears in two contexts: In the first context, the trainees attend a basic training course where they are taught various techniques and are meant to practise the "geziene technieken" at home. Then, once they have completed the basic training course, they have the option of returning to the training centre to perfect the "geziene technieken" over an extended period of time. Either interpretation would fit the context. The native Dutch speaker in the Textpertise Translation partnership is not happy to just assume it means "observed" and seems to feel it should be "standard", "accepted" or "approved". But he is a Dutchman from the Netherlands where this usage is unknown so input from a native Belgian translator would be particularly appreciated.

08:36 May 10, 2011 

Hi T, you posed a good question, and the answer depends on the context. Most likely it 'just' means 'viewed' or 'observed', as you said.