| 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] > | Ten common myths about translation quality
|
|---|
| | Oliver Walter 
United Kingdom
Local time: 17:40
German to English
+ ...
| Criterion, criteria, native | Jul 24, 2013 |
criteria is the plural, but the singular is criterion - it's from Greek (meaning judge or decide), not Latin.
When I was employed as an engineer, I had at least one colleague (native English speaker) who didn't know whether criteria and phenomena were singular or plural. Some non-native speakers have a better knowledge of grammar and syntax than many native ones but I think the native ones often have a better "feel" for how a certain concept should ... See more criteria is the plural, but the singular is criterion - it's from Greek (meaning judge or decide), not Latin.
When I was employed as an engineer, I had at least one colleague (native English speaker) who didn't know whether criteria and phenomena were singular or plural. Some non-native speakers have a better knowledge of grammar and syntax than many native ones but I think the native ones often have a better "feel" for how a certain concept should be expressed (and yes, as discussions in these forums have shown, it's not always easy to define what is a native user of a given language).
Oliver ▲ Collapse
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 22:10
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Yes this is true of many people in former colonies | Jul 25, 2013 |
Lincoln Hui wrote:
My native language is Chinese and my English is CLEARLY better than my Chinese. I'm not particularly proud of it but it is true, and my Chinese isn't even bad.
Like Hong Kong, India too was under the British for some time. India has an extensive education system based on English, especially in higher education. English is used in administration, business and higher education. Because of this, here too, it is quite common to find people who know English better than any other language.
I suppose this would be true of French in Algeria, Russian in Poland, Spanish in South America, and so on.
As languages internationalize, the natives tend to loose control over it and non-natives begin to increasingly contribute to the further development of the language.
In today's world, English is the most internationalized language, and the concept of native language is of the least significance in this language. Probably, already, proficient non-native users of English far outnumber native English speakers globally.
This could explain the great anguish felt by native English speakers at the non-native take over of their language.
One can understand their anguish, but historical processes are inexorable and there is hardly anything that can be done to roll back English into the islands of the UK. It would be easier to reconcile oneself to the realities of the world and move forward.
What is of relevance to the translation industry and us translators, is that myths like only natives doing translation can severely constrict the uninhibited development of the translation sector; can affect the quality of the translation output by jobs being restricted to unqualified natives and excluded from experienced non-native translators proficient in the target language; and push up the prices, as the myth allows some translators (the natives) to charge a premium for their native status (this of course, is slightly offset by non-native translators offering a discount to acquire business, but this latter can affect all translators and its effect can be a dampener on prices).
The saner ground would be to face realities head-on, and base the translation sector on different quality metrics than the outdated and dysfunctional native-only theory.
Outsourcers and clients particularly need to come on board, as the myth affects them most and they need to read into the marketing pitch floated by native translators that only natives produce excellent translation. This has been admitted in this thread itself by some native translators, and it should serve as an eye-opener to outsources and clients who have so far been banking excessively on native translators for quality translations.
[Edited at 2013-07-25 06:41 GMT]
| | | | Lincoln Hui
Hong Kong
Local time: 00:40
Member
Chinese to English
+ ...
| We all have horror stories to tell of Americans' writing | Jul 25, 2013 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
According to your language combinations, (REDACTED FOR LENGTH)
Bernhard
[Edited at 2013-07-24 20:20 GMT]
My Chinese is well above average (in terms of writing at least) compared to other native Chinese speakers, I was speaking and writing it everyday until I went to college in the US and I continue to do so now that I'm based in Hong Kong. As far as translation is concerned I am inclined to think that it is not so much a matter of whether you can, but whether you will go to the lengths of actually thinking about how to best translate any given text, and I would certainly consider myself to be in the upper-end even by translator standards.
Nevertheless my English is better than my Chinese, and it's not even close; my parents, who are fully bilingual themselves, have commented on it as such. Given the typical standards of writing that I've had to proofread in papers written by my college peers in their senior years, I must say that "native-speaker" is not a very high hurdle to clear indeed. My knowledge of Central Pennsylvanian slangs and colloquials could pass for a townie of State College, PA; the one area where I will concede less-than-native knowledge is in food, sometimes to my great regret when I went to restuarants.
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
Like Hong Kong, India too was under the British for some time. (REDACTED FOR LENGTH)
Curiously enough, I never really learned a word of English in Hong Kong. The bulk of my English skills came when I went to Singapore with family at the age of ten, barely able to string together one coherent sentence at that time (thanks mom: I literally spent two hours a day, seven days a week, drilling grammar and vocabulary and books with her for the better part of two years), and then when I went to the US for my Bachelor's degree. I do not have a very high opinion of English education in Hong Kong at all; I came back from Singapore when I was 13, and thereafter could get an A in every school English test and exam blindfolded, in an ostensibly English-based school and one of the top high schools in HK.
I have heard that some Indians speak only English and do not speak any Indian language. I don't know if you can confirm whether this is true.
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 22:10
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Given India's diversity, everything, plus its opposite, is true here | Jul 25, 2013 |
Lincoln Hui wrote:
I have heard that some Indians speak only English and do not speak any Indian language. I don't know if you can confirm whether this is true.
In the larger metropolises like Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai, Bangalore, etc., it would be quite possible to find some people who speak only English and no other language.
To this can be added the category of Indians who go abroad to study, including schooling, and mostly English-speaking countries like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the US and the UK are hot favourites for these people. They grow up knowing only English.
Even in India, there are a number of elitist schools (some of them boarding) which exclusively teach English. These days, many UK school-leaving degrees, can be acquired in India itself, without stepping out of the country even for a day. Students studying in such schools learn through the English medium exclusively.
So it is quite true there are some people in India who speak only English.
But the larger number consists of people who know English to native-level and for whom it is a second language.
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 17:40
Hebrew to English
| Another myth... | Jul 25, 2013 |
Which I don't think has been mentioned yet, surprisingly, is that using a CAT tool equals better quality.
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 22:10
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER
Here is another fashionable myth regarding languages and translation:
It is possible to learn a language to proficiency levels adequate for translation purposes in your adult life.
| | | | | native language is a big extra | Jul 25, 2013 |
Lincoln Hui wrote:
Curiously enough, I never really learned a word of English in Hong Kong. The bulk of my English skills came when I went to Singapore with family at the age of ten, barely able to string together one coherent sentence at that time (thanks mom: I literally spent two hours a day, seven days a week, drilling grammar and vocabulary and books with her for the better part of two years), and then when I went to the US for my Bachelor's degree. I do not have a very high opinion of English education in Hong Kong at all; I came back from Singapore when I was 13, and thereafter could get an A in every school English test and exam blindfolded, in an ostensibly English-based school and one of the top high schools in HK. ...
It seems that English is indeed one of your native languages because you learned it as a child in Singapore with your mother and then went to an English-language school in Hong Kong and continued to use it in the US.
So it seems that you are "better" in English because you had more experience using it since you were a child, at home, in school, and later at the university. That doesn't mean you couldn't improve your other native language which you are probably very good at anyway because the groundwork is laid (you did learn Chinese as a child).
I believe your skill as a translator can be based on an extraordinary bi-lingual "nativeness" in a particular variant of the Chinese languages (right?) and English.
And that's what I call a great advantage.
What I and many others have rejected in the thread
http://www.proz.com/forum/prozcom_suggestions/227485-should_“native_language”_claims_be_verified.html
is that some people will claim in translator profiles to have two or more native languages when it is clearly not the case at all, when the mistakes they make are so obvious that any other native speaker and even non-native speaker of that language who are also translators using that language recognize that such claim is just plain false.
Furthermore, it is very unlikely that a professional translator who is not a native speaker of X will render a better translation into X than a native speaker of X, given they both are educated at the university level, have the same field of experience, and work in the same language direction.
I say this because it shows how important/telling the label "native speaker" is in our profession. It doesn't mean you speak that native language like a five-year-old or an uneducated person, but you are an educated translator with that native language.
For our purposes, it might be better to think of the "native-speaker" characteristic as that of a translator.
For those of you who now will argue that verification of native languages would then have to involve complex writing and speaking tests, I want to say: No. Fellow native speakers evaluate the speech (use of the language, accent) to determine if the person is indeed a native speaker, nothing more. A six-year old native speaker would pass the test or, for that matter, could conduct the test. But they're not applying to be translators or interviewers.
Instead, translators would evaluate translators, and the level of their native language skills will already be much higher than that of a six-year-old.
Nevertheless, it would just be an evaluation of the "typical use of that language by its native speakers."
You can continue to argue that even a bad non-native speaker of that language might be better (use of grammar, style, etc.) than a six-year old native speaker, but that's not what this is about. The "feel" for the native language will not be there by non-natives, no matter how well they speak it, even if it can be very similar when the non-native was able to learn the language very well.
But why call yourself a native speaker in a language when you are not? Why not stick to claiming your real native languages?
"Nativeness in a language" alone doesn't qualify you as a translator. But, but ....
But claiming to be a native speaker when you're not is a two-fold problem in our profession: firstly, it's a lie when you are not, and secondly, when someone says they are a native speaker in our profession, it means that not only are they fluent in that language and, on top of that, have all the necessary education in that language and knowledge and experience in subject fields to render excellent translations but possess that added extra, the "native-speaker" characteristic that others clearly lack.
It's a big extra, it's at least a big part of your childhood and your command of the feel for that language is such that can never be reached by non-natives. They can become great in a non-native language, which is a prerequisite for being a translator anyway, but natives they will never be. Consider the word: native
I know that the discussions will go on.
But, if you claim to be a native speaker of my native language, German, then don't tell me you just learned it as an adult.
Simply put: when translating from Y to X, and defining
NL X: Native Language is X
NNL X: non-native but very high proficiency level of X
NL Y: Native Language is Y
NNL Y: non-native but very high proficiency level of Y
I submit:
1. NL X + NNL Y + TALENT + EDUCATION + EXPERIENCE = EXCELLENT TRANSLATION INTO X (quality guaranteed)
2. NNL X + NL Y + TALENT + EDUCATION + EXPERIENCE = NOT SO EXCELLENT TRANSLATION INTO X
Variant of above: COLLABORATION
3. NNL X + NL Y (translator 1) + TALENT + EDUCATION + EXPERIENCE +
NL X + NNL Y (translator 2) + TALENT + EDUCATION + EXPERIENCE =
EXCELLENT TRANSLATION
4. NNL X but CLAIMING NL X + ........ (WHATEVER): UNACCEPTABLE (it's a lie)
Bernhard
[Edited at 2013-07-25 15:58 GMT]
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 22:10
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | For me native language is a geographical idea | Jul 25, 2013 |
The very word "native" in native language indicates that it refers to an area where a language originated and where its original speakers live since the time the language emerged. Anyone living in that area long enough or since birth will pick up that language as their native language. Anyone moving out of that area and settling down in an area which is the native area of another language will gradually loose his original native language and his language will get more and more penetrated by the ... See more The very word "native" in native language indicates that it refers to an area where a language originated and where its original speakers live since the time the language emerged. Anyone living in that area long enough or since birth will pick up that language as their native language. Anyone moving out of that area and settling down in an area which is the native area of another language will gradually loose his original native language and his language will get more and more penetrated by the dominant language of the new area he has moved into.
What Bernhard describes is proficiency in a language, which is a separate concept to native language. A native speaker of a language is not necessarily proficient in it, and a non-native speaker who has learned a language since childhood is not necessarily not proficient in it because it is not his native language.
Since in modern times, people keep moving about, and in and out of their native area, the concept of native language is irrelevant.
Also these days languages too are moving out of their native areas which also makes the idea of native language irrelevant. Take the case of English, you can find people proficient in English anywhere on the globe, and not all of them are native speakers of English.
This is the reason why native language is a vague and inapplicable concept for translation purposes.
To be a good translator what is needed is not that you be native speaker of source and target, but that you be proficient in them, especially the target language. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Isn't it time we stopped this sterile debate on the subject?
We all know who thinks what but repeating the arguments over and over again like a stuck record isn't going to do any good.
I am a great believer in native speakers working into their native language BUT I am also aware that there are exceptions to that rule.
What worries me much more is that, on the strength of very little language knowledge, there are a lot of people out there who claim to be translators, offer sho... See more Isn't it time we stopped this sterile debate on the subject?
We all know who thinks what but repeating the arguments over and over again like a stuck record isn't going to do any good.
I am a great believer in native speakers working into their native language BUT I am also aware that there are exceptions to that rule.
What worries me much more is that, on the strength of very little language knowledge, there are a lot of people out there who claim to be translators, offer shoddy work, charge low rates (just as well, given their standard) and generally bring the profession into disrepute.
But, my saying this on repeated occasions isn't going to change things one little bit. SO, I'll stop bashing my head against a brick wall and get on with my life. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | native language is not at all irrelevant | Jul 25, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
What Bernhard describes is proficiency in a language, which is a separate concept to native language. A native speaker of a language is not necessarily proficient in it, and a non-native speaker who has learned a language since childhood is not necessarily not proficient in it because it is not his native language.
Sorry, but no, that's not what I am describing. Please re-read my previous entry.
The point I make is that "native language" stands for that added extra in our profession that implies incredible feel for that language.
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
Since in modern times, people keep moving about, and in and out of their native area, the concept of native language is irrelevant.
Don't follow your logic here. The majority of people stays in their native area. And that's what's relevant for the concept .
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
Also these days languages too are moving out of their native areas which also makes the idea of native language irrelevant. Take the case of English, you can find people proficient in English anywhere on the globe, and not all of them are native speakers of English.
This is the reason why native language is a vague and inapplicable concept for translation purposes.
I don't see German or even Us-English move out of its area. The concept is not at all irrelevant to clients who need translations carried out by native speakers of these languages.
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
To be a good translator what is needed is not that you be native speaker of source and target, but that you be proficient in them, especially the target language.
That is not consistent with the concept of "native language skill" in our profession. If a translator claims to be a native speaker of X, it is understood that the translator acquired that language first in childhood and continues to use it in our profession. "Native language" is an extra that points to the feel for that language which is important in most subject fields. It stands for best possible translation quality.
B
edited for typo.
[Edited at 2013-07-25 16:24 GMT]
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 22:10
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | And which few natives can claim to have | Jul 25, 2013 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
"Native language" is an extra that points to the feel for that language which is important in most subject fields. It stands for best-possible translation quality.
If you put it in that nebulous way, all that I can say is that most natives lack that "native language feel and touch" which "stands for the best possible translation quality", because their output sorely displays lack of this "native language feel and touch".
Which is why we constantly hear complaints about poor and atrocious translations.
If translations are done by proficient translators and not native translators, we would hear much less complaints.
| | | | | native language skills can be retained outside of one's "native area" but not acquired later in life | Jul 25, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
The very word "native" in native language indicates that it refers to an area where a language originated and where its original speakers live since the time the language emerged. Anyone living in that area long enough or since birth will pick up that language as their native language. Anyone moving out of that area and settling down in an area which is the native area of another language will gradually loose his original native language and his language will get more and more penetrated by the dominant language of the new area he has moved into.
How can you make the generalization that "anyone moving out of that area and settling down in an area which is the native area of another language will gradually lose his original native language and his language will get more and more penetrated by the dominant language of the new area he has moved into?"
By continuing to use your native language, especially as a translator, and everything else available to you (in my case teaching German, conversing in German with my family, using German internet resources, etc.) and all that on a daily basis, you are not gradually losing anything, not in the least your "feel" for your native language. You should try it yourself.
What you can never acquire later in life, as an adult, is that feel for your native language.
B
| | |
|
|
|
| The finishing point | Jul 25, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
Since in modern times, people keep moving about, and in and out of their native area, the concept of native language is irrelevant.
This is the reason why native language is a vague and inapplicable concept for translation purposes.
To be a good translator what is needed is not that you be native speaker of source and target, but that you be proficient in them, especially the target language.
Proficiency in translation is delivering translated text that looks, sounds, and feels like written by and for people living in the target language geographic locus.
Quite honestly, being a native resident of Brazil, I have seen some translations into BR Portuguese by some countryfellows of mine - who may have never set foot outside this country - and that look, sound, and feel mostly like English written using Portuguese words.
Conversely, I've read some texts originally written in English, by Brazilian translators who obdurately refuse to translate out of their native language, that would make any acclaimed English language writer jealous.
Therefore, the maladroitness lies in demanding absolutely such a vague attribute as 'native speaker', while neglecting the individual's actual proficiency in translation and target-language writing ability as the most essential requirements.
[Edited at 2013-07-25 16:28 GMT]
| | | | | native language combined with talent, education, and experience enables excellent translations | Jul 25, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote: Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
"Native language" is an extra that points to the feel for that language which is important in most subject fields. It stands for best-possible translation quality.
If you put it in that nebulous way, all that I can say is that most natives lack that "native language feel and touch" which "stands for the best possible translation quality", because their output sorely displays lack of this "native language feel and touch". Which is why we constantly hear complaints about poor and atrocious translations. If translations are done by proficient translators and not native translators, we would hear much less complaints.
When native language is combined with talent, education, and experience in our profession, it can be assumed it is indeed an added quality that enables the best translation quality. I said before that the "native speaker" label stands for quality. Naturally, it is only true if everything else is true too.
I wouldn't say that most natives or most native translators lack that feel. If they are native speakers, they do have that feel but it doesn't help them much if they do not have the required education and experience to be excellent translators.
But that shouldn't permit us to argue that "native language" doesn't matter in our profession. It surely does matter.
B
[Edited at 2013-07-25 23:14 GMT]
| | | | | native language does matter, practically, and as a concept | Jul 25, 2013 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Quite honestly, being a native resident of Brazil, I have seen some translations into BR Portuguese by some countryfellows of mine - who may have never set foot outside this country - and that look, sound, and feel mostly like English written using Portuguese words.
Conversely, I've read some texts originally written in English, by Brazilian translators who obdurately refuse to translate out of their native language, that would make any acclaimed English language writer jealous.
Therefore, the maladroitness lies in demanding absolutely such a vague attribute as 'native speaker', while neglecting the individual's actual proficiency in translation and target-language writing ability as the most essential requirements.
Just because you have seen bad translations by native speaker translators doesn't allow the conclusion that native language is not a valid asset, isn't indeed an accepted concept in our profession or should be equated with a translator's "proficiency" by itself (even though it is equated with it in our profession). .
A professional client will want the best possible quality, and there is really no arguing that someone who is educated in that language, has studied various subject areas, is experienced as a translator, and translates into his native language, will render a better translation than his non-native counterpart.
Gotta run,
B
[Edited at 2013-07-25 16:52 GMT]
| | | | | 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] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Ten common myths about translation quality | 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 
Translation news
