| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183] > | Should “native language” claims be verified? Thread poster: XXXphxxx (X)
|
|---|
XXXphxxx (X) 
United Kingdom
Local time: 02:12
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
This has been mentioned a couple of times. I don't expect policing a "non-native button" would actually require as much manpower as replying to support requests on this and related issues.
Let’s not forget that the ProZ forum is completely public, any outsourcer can read anything we write here, without even logging in. What are their views going to be of the site and its members when they realise how little verification there is of members’/non-members’ claims/credentials and... See more This has been mentioned a couple of times. I don't expect policing a "non-native button" would actually require as much manpower as replying to support requests on this and related issues.
Let’s not forget that the ProZ forum is completely public, any outsourcer can read anything we write here, without even logging in. What are their views going to be of the site and its members when they realise how little verification there is of members’/non-members’ claims/credentials and that our own demands for this situation to be rectified are going unheeded?
[Edited at 2012-06-21 20:26 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
This has been mentioned a couple of times. I don't expect policing a "non-native button" would actually require as much manpower as replying to support requests on this and related issues.
If you don't "expect" much manpower to be required, the implication is you have some idea of the process by which this would work (otherwise how could one have expectations of the manpower levels?). I would be intrigued to hear it - my imagination only conjures up faxes of birth certificates and/or the compilation of lists of online references to impeccably produced output in the language in question, to be reviewed by a panel of experts (an odd number, so there can be no tie) who would need to be selected, etc., etc. and/or some kind of linguistic cultural test...
Perhaps for you and I, this would be fairly rapid, after all, we're forever posting, but what of the more taciturn members? (Although perhaps the less you say, the less likely you are to get pointed at...)
Let’s not forget that the ProZ forum is completely public, any outsourcer can read anything we write here, without even logging in. What are their views going to be of the site and its members when they realise how little verification there is of members’/non-members’ claims/credentials and that our own demands for this situation to be rectified are going unheeded?
Same as they were in 2006? Or even before that.... Somehow the site struggles on, seemingly against the odds. Oh, hang on....
(Things is, I suspect the silent majority of paying members don't care about this or any other of our bugbears. And we haven't got a metaphorical King's horse to chuck ourselves under, either.)
| | | | Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 21:12
Spanish to English
+ ...
| See my earlier posts in this thread... | Jun 21, 2012 |
Charlie Bavington wrote: Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
This has been mentioned a couple of times. I don't expect policing a "non-native button" would actually require as much manpower as replying to support requests on this and related issues. If you don't "expect" much manpower to be required, the implication is you have some idea of the process by which this would work (otherwise how could one have expectations of the manpower levels?). I would be intrigued to hear it - my imagination only conjures up faxes of birth certificates and/or the compilation of lists of online references to impeccably produced output in the language in question, to be reviewed by a panel of experts (an odd number, so there can be no tie) who would need to be selected, etc., etc. and/or some kind of linguistic cultural test... Perhaps for you and I, this would be fairly rapid, after all, we're forever posting, but what of the more taciturn members? (Although perhaps the less you say, the less likely you are to get pointed at...)
Let’s not forget that the ProZ forum is completely public, any outsourcer can read anything we write here, without even logging in. What are their views going to be of the site and its members when they realise how little verification there is of members’/non-members’ claims/credentials and that our own demands for this situation to be rectified are going unheeded?
Same as they were in 2006? Or even before that.... Somehow the site struggles on, seemingly against the odds. Oh, hang on.... (Things is, I suspect the silent majority of paying members don't care about this or any other of our bugbears. And we haven't got a metaphorical King's horse to chuck ourselves under, either.)
...where I make what I think are viable enough suggestions to at least serve as a starting point....
| | | | Roman M
United States
Local time: 21:12
Russian to English
| I would just like to point out that... | Jun 21, 2012 |
The stigma of translating into a non-native language is making life harder for people like me who, for one reason or another, are more comfortable with and better at translating into a non-native language. Thank you for keeping it alive.
| | |
|
|
|
| not what we were saying | Jun 21, 2012 |
Roman Maksimyuk wrote:
The stigma of translating into a non-native language is making life harder for people like me who, for one reason or another, are more comfortable with and better at translating into a non-native language. Thank you for keeping it alive.
Hi Roman
That's not really what we were saying. The issue is of people claiming that they are 'native' in a language when they really don't have a full grasp of it. I think several posts have said that it's acceptable to translate into a non-native language for whatever reason, but that is different from claiming native competence in a language when your written grasp is somewhat shaky. If you could see the English used by some of the people we are referring to then you would completely understand the issue.
Best wishes
Vikki
| | | | | Still sounds like a lot of work | Jun 21, 2012 |
Robert Forstag wrote:
...where I make what I think are viable enough suggestions to at least serve as a starting point....
Do you mean this?
Once again, if the criterion for proving false claims requires multiple and egregious misuse of one's supposed native tongue, then enforcement of such a rule should not prove either onerous or controversial.
Because, while I agree that approach seems the obvious solution, it still sounds like a lot of work for the accuser, in compiling a list of the misuses, or for the accused, in compiling a list of perfect prose to counter such claims, or indeed both depending on the circumstances, plus whoever has to check it. All the more so if the evidence is not to be found on here. As you say, once the case has been built, it shouldn't be controversial to enforce, but I think the onerous part might arise in building and checking the case in the first place, and allowing those so accused to defend themselves (ideally, anyway). Perhaps my idea of due process is a bit too involved...
| | | | | Native language | Jun 21, 2012 |
This is really a very complex problem. Somebody's native language in the multicultural world is not only the L1 they learned as a child. This is an outdated model some linguistic sources still hold on to. With the increased immigration some people may forget their L1 if they immigrate to a different country at an early age or they were forced to use a different language for one reason or another. Also, if your higher education is not in your L1 you cannot really claim the same fluency in it as ... See more This is really a very complex problem. Somebody's native language in the multicultural world is not only the L1 they learned as a child. This is an outdated model some linguistic sources still hold on to. With the increased immigration some people may forget their L1 if they immigrate to a different country at an early age or they were forced to use a different language for one reason or another. Also, if your higher education is not in your L1 you cannot really claim the same fluency in it as the people with PhDs or Master's Degrees in that language. My mother forgot her mother tongue at the age of about 6, and later she was considered a native speaker of another language, so it is not so simple to determine which language is really your native language -- it also depends for what purposes such a consideration is made. This is how Wikipedia sees the problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_language ▲ Collapse
| | | | | What would a birth certificate prove? | Jun 21, 2012 |
I entirely agree that *as a rule* (heavy emphasis) it is best to translate into one's mother (or native) tongue. But, but, but, to deal with those annoying translators who claim that language X is their mother (or native) tongue, how is it to be proved?
Even if Proz were to require the production of a birth certificate indicating one's place of birth and parentage, how would that prove what was one's mother tongue?
Where a baby happens to have been born proves nothing about the langu... See more I entirely agree that *as a rule* (heavy emphasis) it is best to translate into one's mother (or native) tongue. But, but, but, to deal with those annoying translators who claim that language X is their mother (or native) tongue, how is it to be proved?
Even if Proz were to require the production of a birth certificate indicating one's place of birth and parentage, how would that prove what was one's mother tongue?
Where a baby happens to have been born proves nothing about the language that baby learned to speak. And, especially in the case of women, one's surname at birth might well no longer be one's surname at the time of claiming to be a native speaker of language X.
Would that mean also being required to produce marriage certificates, divorce decrees, and so on? How horrendous and totally unacceptable!
Pressing on regardless,
Jenny ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Nothing, of itself | Jun 21, 2012 |
I was working on the hypothesis that a body of evidence would need to built up to refute allegations of non-nativeness. Quite clearly, for myriad reasons, a birth certificate in and of itself alone proves diddly squat, except perhaps that one did not spontaneously appear miraculously out of the ether. But by the same token, it could be a factor to be taken into consideration. Although on reflection, a certificate or two of an exam or two taken in one's youth (aound 16-18) would probably be of mo... See more I was working on the hypothesis that a body of evidence would need to built up to refute allegations of non-nativeness. Quite clearly, for myriad reasons, a birth certificate in and of itself alone proves diddly squat, except perhaps that one did not spontaneously appear miraculously out of the ether. But by the same token, it could be a factor to be taken into consideration. Although on reflection, a certificate or two of an exam or two taken in one's youth (aound 16-18) would probably be of more value in trying to assess what language(s) one is likely to have that intuitive feel for plus (hopefully) the broad vocabulary of a rounded education for those whose "best" language is, indeed, not that of the land of their birth.
Truth is, I don't think any single document would prove anything, I was and am just bouncing ideas around (with the agenda, admittedly, that proving "native level" is a major exercise if failing the test means having aspersions cast on the honesty of one's profile on the world's leading website for the profession) having switched Question Time off in annoyance some time ago ▲ Collapse
| | | | Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 21:12
Spanish to English
+ ...
| It shouldn't be all that complicated... | Jun 21, 2012 |
Charlie Bavington wrote: Robert Forstag wrote:
...where I make what I think are viable enough suggestions to at least serve as a starting point.... Do you mean this?
Once again, if the criterion for proving false claims requires multiple and egregious misuse of one's supposed native tongue, then enforcement of such a rule should not prove either onerous or controversial.
Because, while I agree that approach seems the obvious solution, it still sounds like a lot of work for the accuser, in compiling a list of the misuses, or for the accused, in compiling a list of perfect prose to counter such claims, or indeed both depending on the circumstances, plus whoever has to check it. All the more so if the evidence is not to be found on here. As you say, once the case has been built, it shouldn't be controversial to enforce, but I think the onerous part might arise in building and checking the case in the first place, and allowing those so accused to defend themselves (ideally, anyway). Perhaps my idea of due process is a bit too involved...
...at least in the most egregious cases (which, to avoid the kind of litigious nightmare you're describing, ought to be the only ones targeted).
So, say, if I notice over time that member "X", who claims English as a native language, has written a dozen or so forum posts that are so riddled with basic errors that one might stand a better chance of finding 10 righteous men in Sodom than 10 grammatical sentences in "X"'s entire inventory of forum contributions, I might write a note to staff challenging "X"s claim of English as a mother tongue. Staff could then quickly verify the legitimacy of my charge, remove "English" as native from X's profile, and that would be the end of it.
Again, we aren't talking about 40 lashes for an errant comma and tarring and feathering for a dangling modifier....
This doesn't strike me as so brain-wrackingly difficult.
Yet it does strike me as something that would bolster proz.com's professional image, and win points with site members and users who have asked that something be done to repair this (damaged) image, at relatively little cost to itself, and without sacrificing its cherished open-door model that welcomes all comers.
It seems that one might level the criticism that such a rule would unfairly target false claims of English as native (since this is the language most often used in the forums, and is also the language most subject to critical scrutiny on the part of native speakers). But one should start somewhere. And false claims of other languages as native could also be made and corroborated.
I think it a reasonable proposition, but I of course won't be holding my breath until it is embraced as site policy....
[Edited at 2012-06-22 03:07 GMT]
| | | | | Not the subject of this forum. | Jun 22, 2012 |
Roman Maksimyuk wrote:
The stigma of translating into a non-native language is making life harder for people like me who, for one reason or another, are more comfortable with and better at translating into a non-native language. Thank you for keeping it alive.
You clearly state your native language is Russian. If clients prefer to use a Russian native to translate into a foreign language, that's their business. At least they know they are hiring a native Russian speaker. This forum is about people who try to claim they are native speakers of a language that is not their native language.
(ps Are you really better at translating into a non-native language than into your own????)
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 09:12
Chinese to English
| The "one native language only" suggestion is the best | Jun 22, 2012 |
To summarise the three suggestions I've seen in this thread:
1) Proz staff verify all native languages
2) Proz staff rule on challenges to "native" status
3) Proz staff verify all second native languages
(1) is likely to involve too much work.
(2) has the potential for causing great strife - I wouldn't want to be involved in an "accusation" against a colleague.
(3) seems close to workable to me.
In practical terms, each... See more To summarise the three suggestions I've seen in this thread:
1) Proz staff verify all native languages
2) Proz staff rule on challenges to "native" status
3) Proz staff verify all second native languages
(1) is likely to involve too much work.
(2) has the potential for causing great strife - I wouldn't want to be involved in an "accusation" against a colleague.
(3) seems close to workable to me.
In practical terms, each Proz member would be allowed to state only one native language. If they wished to add a native language, they would have to be verified in a process much like verification of other credentials. As a suggestion: if you're claiming native proficiency in language X, and you can show you got a degree in a university in the relevant country, you could be allowed native status. That's far from perfect - I know a lot of Chinese people with degrees from Brit universities whose English is frankly terrible - but it's a standard that can be easily verified, and is relevant. If you can write degree level papers in English, then you are at the very least able to string a sentence together.
I'm sure there are a few people who would be caught out by this system, but it should only be a small number (Proz should be able to check: no. of members currently claiming two native languages with no degrees). A separate procedure could be set up to handle those few. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 03:12
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| To circumvent | Jun 22, 2012 |
Phil Hand wrote:
3) Proz staff verify all second native languages
As a suggestion: if you're claiming native proficiency in language X, and you can show you got a degree in a university in the relevant country, you could be allowed native status.
To circumvent: simply declare the country in which you studied as your second native language, and the other language as your first native language.
| | | | 564354352 (X)
Denmark
Local time: 03:12
Danish to English
+ ...
| No, they should not | Jun 22, 2012 |
Or if such verification becomes a requirement, I will withdraw my membership immediately. I would not be willing to submit the kind of verification that would be needed, e.g. birth certificate, to a comemrcial site like Proz. And I would not want to be a member of a site where I need to prove that I am not a liar. What an insult that would be.
If people want to lie about their natioanlity, that is their choice.
If they can't deliver the quality translations clients require th... See more Or if such verification becomes a requirement, I will withdraw my membership immediately. I would not be willing to submit the kind of verification that would be needed, e.g. birth certificate, to a comemrcial site like Proz. And I would not want to be a member of a site where I need to prove that I am not a liar. What an insult that would be.
If people want to lie about their natioanlity, that is their choice.
If they can't deliver the quality translations clients require they will soon trip up themselves anway, so what's the big deal, really?
There seems to be an assumption in this forum, that membership of ProZ.com is some kind of quality stamp in itself, whereas in reality, ProZ.com is just another commercial site for translators and outsourcers who are at all liberty to use the site whichever way they want. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 03:12
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Not everyone use[s] the forums | Jun 22, 2012 |
Robert Forstag wrote:
So, say, if I notice over time that member "X", who claims English as a native language, has written a dozen or so forum posts that are so riddled with basic errors...
I wonder what percentage of e.g. paying memberrs use the forums regularly (or at all). Probably a small number.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Should “native language” claims be verified? | 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! » |
| | 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 
