| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | Poll: Have you ever been asked to prove you are really a native speaker of the language you declare? Thread poster: ProZ.com Staff
|
|---|
Williamson 
United Kingdom
Local time: 05:21
Flemish to English
+ ...
| Definition of the COE: Iffy? | Dec 6, 2011 |
I never claimed to be a native speaker of English. However, it is a language I've been using for 36 years.
Should I translate into English or into my native tongue, I'll always ask the opinion of two other persons: one is a specialist in the matter and the other goes over the translation from a linguists point of view. Nobody is perfect. When I get tired, I tend to omit small parts of a translation, so native or not, it is better not to work alone.
With regard to the CO... See more I never claimed to be a native speaker of English. However, it is a language I've been using for 36 years.
Should I translate into English or into my native tongue, I'll always ask the opinion of two other persons: one is a specialist in the matter and the other goes over the translation from a linguists point of view. Nobody is perfect. When I get tired, I tend to omit small parts of a translation, so native or not, it is better not to work alone.
With regard to the COE-definition: I estimate that I am at level C1, level C2 being the language used by the Economist, WSJ and the BBC (my teacher of English).
Ty Kendall wrote:
Your definition of fluent is also iffy:
It is not my definition, but a definition of the Council of Europe.
http://www.coe.int/t/DG4/Portfolio/?M=/main_pages/levels.html
Have a look at C1 and C2.
I did not know that the definition of the specialists at the COE was iffy. In the past decade, this framework has become widely accepted.
Back on track: No, I've never been asked to prove that I am really a native speaker of the language I declare. I guess this is a question for Proz.com statistical purposes only. When I meet people and the use on of those five languages, I'll answer them in that language.
The native-only discussion was also rehashed in the German forum.
http://www.proz.com/forum/german/212312-muttersprachenprinzip.html
The point of view was much more subtle than those of natives of English. The latter seem to have only one argument to sell their services: being native, expertise not required.
What if an outsourcer had the choice between a non-native at level C2, who is specialized in a very specific domain or a native at level C1, who is a generalist.
Who would be chosen to do the job?
When while you are doing escort/facilitating interpreting, a speaker from a multilingual group addressess you in a language, which you know well, but which is not your mother-tongue, what are you going to answer: I am sorry, you don't speak my native language, so I can't answer you in your own language. A bit silly, isn't it? Verbum volant, scriptum manent
Wasn't proz.com's way of checking a telephone conversation by one of the moderators, i.e. by using spoken language as a means of proving that? In case of one of my fellow students at an evening course, they would be fooled. He is Polish, but has studied at Oxford and speaks Queen's English (R.P.)
[Edited at 2011-12-06 16:23 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Michele Fauble wrote: Williamson wrote:
Why does the naive native thingy pops up time and again?
Because non-natives make non-native mistakes, like the ones in your post.
...which is why texts that need to be more than just comprehensible (eg corporate communications, magazine articles, literature, etc.) need to be translated by a professional translator who is also a native speaker of the target language.
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 05:21
Hebrew to English
| COE definitions | Dec 7, 2011 |
First of all, even the COE steer clear of using the "F" word frivolously, only using it once as an adverb to describe a "proficient user" which as a label (as far as labels go) is far more accurate than "fluent speaker". So, hats off to them there.
Just because what you consider to be an auspicious body defines it so, doesn't make it true or universal. This is also disregarding the fact that the COE categories are for a "Framework of Reference: Learning, Teaching, Assessment" and "Such a simple "Global Scale" makes it easier to communicate the system to non-specialist users and will also provide teachers and curriculum planners with orientation points"
So, even by their own admission, these arbitrary classifications were never intended to be used by professional linguists, merely guidelines for teachers and learners, more for purposes of pedagogy than anything else.
I'm not saying they're pointless or wrong, just not wholly linguistic/scientific, nor should they be invoked as a definition of "fluency", which is why if you scrutinize them, you can see my point that by those definitions, even some native speakers could theoretically be considered not fluent in their own language(s).
But, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Poll: Have you ever been asked to prove you are really a native speaker of the language you declare? | 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 » |
| | 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! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
