quasi-quantifying language proficiency Thread poster: Richard Bartholomew
|
|---|
There's a lot of discssion in these fora about what constitutes native language ability, but not much about lesser degrees of proficiency. How do you describe your level of acomplishment in your second or third language?
I expected people to use the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages or the Association of Language Testers in Europe scales, but site searches for "CERF" and "Language Testers" produced surprisingly few hits.
Is there some more popular way to... See more There's a lot of discssion in these fora about what constitutes native language ability, but not much about lesser degrees of proficiency. How do you describe your level of acomplishment in your second or third language?
I expected people to use the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages or the Association of Language Testers in Europe scales, but site searches for "CERF" and "Language Testers" produced surprisingly few hits.
Is there some more popular way to express this? ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Language proficiency | Dec 29, 2006 |
Hi Rich - here's something to chew on:
Dominant language
This term has two distinct meanings:
(1) the language of primary competence, the language that a person knows best, which may or may not be the person’s native language. For example, in the case of immigrants educated primarily (or exclusively) in the US, although their native language may be other than English, their primary language competence is in English, not in their native language.
(2) the langu... See more Hi Rich - here's something to chew on:
Dominant language
This term has two distinct meanings:
(1) the language of primary competence, the language that a person knows best, which may or may not be the person’s native language. For example, in the case of immigrants educated primarily (or exclusively) in the US, although their native language may be other than English, their primary language competence is in English, not in their native language.
(2) the language spoken by the dominant class, the recognized standard of correct grammar and usage. Some examples would be "the King's English," "New York Times English", the Spanish prescribed by the Real Academia, etc. The more usual term for this is standard language.
Active languages
(1) The language or languages into which an interpreter is competent to interpret professionally.
(2) The term is also used in meetings & conventions to mean the target languages into which interpreting is provided. For example, in a convention where all presentations are to be given in English and interpretation is provided into Spanish, French, and Russian, these three would be the active languages, while English would be the passive language.
Passive languages
The languages from which an interpreter is competent to interpret professionally. The term is also used in meetings & conventions to mean the languages from which interpreting is provided.
For example, in a meeting where all presentations are given in English and interpretation is provided into Spanish, French, and Russian, English is the passive language and Spanish, French, and Russian the active languages.
http://www.barinas.com/d-h.htm ▲ Collapse
| | | | | interesting nuances | Dec 30, 2006 |
Yes, I see: the native language is often, though not necessarily, the dominant language as defined in (1). I should have written "dominant" instead of "native".
The point, though, is that people seem content to answer the question "How well can you communicate in X?" with "pretty well", "alright I guess", "I took four years in high school", and other responses the meanings of which vary wildly from person to person.
Wikipedia uses phrases like "This user is a nati... See more Yes, I see: the native language is often, though not necessarily, the dominant language as defined in (1). I should have written "dominant" instead of "native".
The point, though, is that people seem content to answer the question "How well can you communicate in X?" with "pretty well", "alright I guess", "I took four years in high school", and other responses the meanings of which vary wildly from person to person.
Wikipedia uses phrases like "This user is a native [sic] speaker of English." or "These users are able to contribute with a basic level of English.". Why not "This user can contribute at CEFR level A1 in English."?
I realize that there will never be a standard unit of language proficiency next to the standard kilogram in Paris, but some quantificatoin and standardization is surely possible. I just wonder why people don't agree on a standard and use it. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Thor Truelson 
United States
Local time: 16:42
Swedish to English
+ ...
Hi. The US Government uses the ACTFL scale to rate language ability. It goes from 0-5, with 0 being a beginner and 5 being a native speaker. Professionaly proficiency is attained at a 3 and only native speakers can be 5. Guys like Henry Kissinger would be like a 4+ just because his first language wasn't English. I guess in a strictly bilingual family, a person could be a 5 in two languages, although it would be odd to attain the same level of education in both languages, so something would ... See more Hi. The US Government uses the ACTFL scale to rate language ability. It goes from 0-5, with 0 being a beginner and 5 being a native speaker. Professionaly proficiency is attained at a 3 and only native speakers can be 5. Guys like Henry Kissinger would be like a 4+ just because his first language wasn't English. I guess in a strictly bilingual family, a person could be a 5 in two languages, although it would be odd to attain the same level of education in both languages, so something would have to give. The whole thing is sort of like an inverted pyramid, where improvement can be rapid at first, but then slow-going. In some tests nothing over 3 is distinguished. You could be a 4, but 3 is the professional standard. A 3 can use all the grammar whenever and however they choose, has a good grasp of cultural nuance and some slang. They can freely discuss virtually any topic to some degree, although they may not have a very deep knowledge of a wide array of things. They are probably extremely well spoken in any areas of specialization, however. They do make some mistakes here and there, but nothing that greatly disturbs meaning. You can look it up and get all of the info online, I am sure. Anyways, within the US Governemnt, this sytem is in place. Teachers are tested within this framework. Not to sully teachers, but many high school language teachers are relatively low-level speakers. The standard there is far lower than what a translation career requires. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Hi Thor,
As computer scientist Andrew S. Tanenbaum is famed to have remarked: "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Andrew_S._Tanenbaum#Attributed). I was heretofore unaware of the ACTFL or its scale, but I'm not surprised to learn of it. I wonder how many others there are.
| | | | Malik Beytek (X)
Local time: 00:42
| They seem to have revised ACTFL scale for the better... | Dec 31, 2006 |
Thor Truelson wrote:
Hi. The US Government uses the ACTFL scale to rate language ability. It goes from 0-5, with 0 being a beginner and 5 being a native speaker. ...
They now seem to have Novice, Intermediate, Advanced, and Superior levels -- in other words they have, in effect, combined levels 3-4-5 into Superior (because they found few university graduates reach even level 3!).
What I like about it is that it doesn't make any reference to any thing like "native speaker".
I got that info from this web page here.
http://www.cal.org/resources/Digest/stansf01.html
So Kissinger is now tops - Superior , which makes a whole lot of sense.
Henry Kissinger speaks English with a degree of clarity several times (about ten times?) as high as what George Bush offers. Who is the "native speaker" here, then?)
| | | | Richard Benham
France
Local time: 23:42
German to English
+ ...
In memoriam | I seem to find references to the CREF everywhere.... | Apr 14, 2007 |
If you Google COMMON EUROPEAN REFERENCE FRAMEWOR, you get over 500 hits, which all seem to relate to language proficiency.
If anyone asks me to describe my accomplishment in my second or third language, I say “C2”. It saves a lot of words.
| | | | | Re: I seem to find references to the CREF everywhere.... | Apr 15, 2007 |
Richard Benham wrote:
If anyone asks me to describe my accomplishment in my second or third language, I say “C2”. It saves a lot of words.
I do too. Usually I'll add that I've passed the ZMP or KDS or Test DaF or whatever with such-and-such scores just to lend credence.
| | |
|
|
|
Richard Benham
France
Local time: 23:42
German to English
+ ...
In memoriam | Problem comes.... | Apr 17, 2007 |
...when you don’t have the diploma to back it up.
In my case, I have the Große Deutsche Sprachdiplom in German, with the grade sehr gut, which is about as much formal evidence of C2-level proficiency as one could hope for. The only thing is, when I use German, I am still acutely aware that I am using a foreign language, but with French I feel much more comfortable, and sometimes have trouble remembering whether I read or heard something in French or in Engl... See more ...when you don’t have the diploma to back it up.
In my case, I have the Große Deutsche Sprachdiplom in German, with the grade sehr gut, which is about as much formal evidence of C2-level proficiency as one could hope for. The only thing is, when I use German, I am still acutely aware that I am using a foreign language, but with French I feel much more comfortable, and sometimes have trouble remembering whether I read or heard something in French or in English (my native language).... But the last formal test of my French was over 30 years ago, long before the CERF was invented, and the current version of the diploma is only rated B2 or something (I forget). So, if asked to defend my claim to C2-level French, all I can say is, “Well, my French is better than my German, and I’ve got a C2-level German diploma....” I would have trouble believing someone who said this; so maybe I should lash out and do the DALF C2.
I do think that language certifications, for all its imperfections, serves a purpose. It is all too easy for job applicants, for instance, to exaggerate their language competence, if the employer is not familiar with the language in question. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Can't argue with success. | Apr 18, 2007 |
Well, if you've been getting work with your current certifications, then they must be adequate. Has anyone
ever asked to see copies of your certificates before
assigning you a project?
| | | | Richard Benham
France
Local time: 23:42
German to English
+ ...
In memoriam
...not that I remember. I don’t actually include my language certifications on my CV, only my translation qualifications.
I think I was asked for copies of all my degrees, diplomas and certificates for one of those exercises that never lead anywhere, when an agency wants to put in a tender to the EU, and so they get a lot of qualified people to submit their CVs and copies of their qualifications, and then, if they get the job, have it done on the cheap by unqualified hacks.
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » quasi-quantifying language proficiency | 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! » |
| | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
