| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13] > | From bad to worse... An advice? Native vs Non-native issue Thread poster: Inga Petkelyte
|
|---|
| I take native speaker to be a valid and reasonable concept | Aug 18, 2015 |
Maria S. Loose, LL.M. wrote: George Hopkins wrote:
Does it really say anything, to be Native or Non-native?
My two youngest grandchildren are officially Swedish citizens although born and bred in France and still living there. Their mother tongue is Swedish but they appear to speak better French than Swedish. Their parents have Swedish as their (mother) main language, the father although British has Swedish as his first and foremost language because we have always spoken Swedish in the family -- although fluent mine still has an English accent after more than sixty years practising. No native pretences there.
Please enlighten me; which of the above individuals are Native or Non-native?
Since I don't see the original post for the George Hopkins quote - or maybe you are just using this as an example, Maria, here's my answer:
Typically, a language learned in childhood and spoken as foremost language throughout one's teenage years will be one's native language. Why? Because it's the language that was acquired in childhood when the brain functions quite differently when it comes to learning languages - let me call it the "natural" or "intuitive way" that includes the way how all sounds are formed intuitively - meaning you can't help but form them that way and you have no difficulty and it's completely natural.
The children mentioned in the quote live and grow up in France and are thus exposed most to French, even if they speak some Swedish at home. When they get older, they will decide what they want or need to speak and it looks like French could be it. That's not to say that they couldn't possibly have intuitively acquired two native languages in their first years, French and Swedish. But true bi-native-language speakers are very rare, because one of these languages will become the dominant one, most likely. That's not to say that they couldn't revive the other as their second native language later, as long as they had the basis they needed as children. If the second language was a true native language (exposure to native language environment and all) it might just be dormant, but it will remain a native language.
You ask how do you know all this or dare claim it? Well, I just have to think about how I learned my native language versus the other languages I know.
I could go on ... But there are plenty of threads on that topic already - like the mega thread from 2012 about verification of native languages at Proz.com
It does seem this discussion is a seasonal favorite and it seems the same people keep saying the same thing. Sounds boring? Don't think it. Look for the better arguments.
Here's my main point: you might be 45 years old and your "main" language (as in I use it most of the time) is English. But you didn't learn it from childhood within a "native" language environment = home, school, friends, other social interactions). For anyone to state in such a case that English is their NATIVE language, is just ridiculous. You can speak and read it very well, and be proud of it, and you might, in very rare cases, be a translator who can translate into that language (I always recommend a native proofreader), but the excellent command of that language is never a strong enough argument to reject the "native language" criterion. Sorry. Hey, why not show off your non-native skill and be proud of it?!
Just think about it. What language did you learn as a child? Do you still use it? Do you use a second language, most likely learned first in a non-native environment (in school for example) and maybe later, as an adult, you continued to learn and use it in the native language culture (well for translators that's often the case). You should be able to understand/recognize what your NATIVE language is, if you're honest. And if you had a native language (well who didn't acquire one) and don't use it anymore or use it as your secondary language, it still doesn't make your new "main" language your native language if you didn't learn it in or from childhood.
Maria S. Loose, LL.M. wrote:
As I have said before on numerous occasions, the European Institutions are using the term "main language", because this term is considered to be less discriminatory than "native language". The ATA uses the term dominant language in addition to "native language" and the ITI uses "language of habitual use" in addition to "native language". All these terms are less discriminatory than "native language" because they don't focus on the language you were "born with" but on the language that you can speak best. This language can change during one's lifetime depending on an individual's circumstances.
[Edited at 2015-08-17 13:21 GMT]
Where does it say that the term native language amounts to discrimination? Is anyone going to be able to claim German as their native language when they learned it as an adult?! Is it their main language? Quite possibly. But native it's not.
Why does it all matter?
Because the concept is real and I doubt that any native speaker (I don't) is going to accept any clearly non-native speaker's claim to the same language as his/her native language as professional conduct.
If we are honest we admit that a TRANSLATOR, a language expert who works in certain fields of expertise, will translate best into his/her NATIVE language AND - ADD-ON - they are usually the best choice when compared with non-natives in the same field. I say mostly. (END OF ADD-ON) In the rare case that he/she translates very well into a non-native language, it is an exception, not the rule, and it doesn't make that non-native language a native language. My thoughts ....
PS: When one claims to speak a language best but it's not a language they spoke in childhood or during their teenage years within a native-language environment, they are clearly at a disadvantage vis a vis those who are truly native speakers. If you think the term "native language" is discriminatory - let's start a thread - but be forewarned - the concept is real, call it what you want.
[Edited at 2015-08-18 05:58 GMT]
PS 2: with "you" I don't mean you Maria in all respects here. I use a more general "you," addressing any reader.
[Edited at 2015-08-18 12:37 GMT]
| | | | | different experiences | Aug 18, 2015 |
Bernhard, let's agree to disagree. You are talking about your personal experiences and I could talk about mine, but I don't want to bore our colleagues with these anecdotes. All I can say is that I've been working for 30 years as an in-house translator in the biggest translation service of the world, the translation service of the European Institutions, which comprises about 300 translators for each of the 28 languages. I served on selection boards for Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian translator... See more Bernhard, let's agree to disagree. You are talking about your personal experiences and I could talk about mine, but I don't want to bore our colleagues with these anecdotes. All I can say is that I've been working for 30 years as an in-house translator in the biggest translation service of the world, the translation service of the European Institutions, which comprises about 300 translators for each of the 28 languages. I served on selection boards for Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian translators and interviewed candidates who had one of these languages as a heritage language but who had lived for years in Australia, New Zeeland or the U.S. and had lost their skills to translate into these Baltic languages. On the other hand, I have a colleague who grew up in Denmark and translates into French. He works in the French translation unit and his only target language is French. Another one grew up in Germany and translates into Portuguese (She works in the Portuguese translation unit with Portuguese as the only target language). And these translators passed the most difficult translators' competitions existing in Europe. So my personal experience is quite different from yours.
As Bala said before, what really counts is the linguistic proficiency of a person and not the way he/she acquired it. That's what exams (conducted by bodies such as ATA, ITI, the U.S. government, EU institutions and others) are there for.
[Edited at 2015-08-18 16:55 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | competition for translators translating into Portuguese | Aug 18, 2015 |
Inga, by the way, the European Personnel Selection Office has launched a competition for translators who translate into Portuguese. No one will ask you about your native language. The prerequisite for participating is a perfect command of Portuguese as evidenced by having attained level C 2 of the self assessment grid of the Common European Framework of References issued by the Council of Europe. Your skills for translating into Portuguese will be assessed by written tests. The application deadl... See more Inga, by the way, the European Personnel Selection Office has launched a competition for translators who translate into Portuguese. No one will ask you about your native language. The prerequisite for participating is a perfect command of Portuguese as evidenced by having attained level C 2 of the self assessment grid of the Common European Framework of References issued by the Council of Europe. Your skills for translating into Portuguese will be assessed by written tests. The application deadline is September 1st. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | About exceptions, native and non-native translators | Aug 18, 2015 |
Maria S. Loose, LL.M. wrote:
Bernhard, let's agree to disagree. You are talking about your personal experiences and I could talk about mine, but I don't want to bore our colleagues with these anecdotes. All I can say is that I've been working for 30 years as an in-house translator in the biggest translation service of the world, the translation service of the European Institutions, which comprises about 300 translators for each of the 28 languages. I served on selection boards for Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian translators and interviewed candidates who had one of these languages as a heritage language but who had lived for years in Australia, New Zeeland or the U.S. and had lost their skills to translate into these Baltic languages. On the other hand, I have a colleague who grew up in Denmark and translates into French. He works in the French translation unit and his only target language is French. Another one grew up in Germany and translates into Portuguese (She works in the Portuguese translation unit with Portuguese as the only target language). And these translators passed the most difficult translators' competitions existing in Europe. So my personal experience is quite different from yours.
As Bala said before, what really counts is the linguistic proficiency of a person and not the way he/she acquired it. That's what exams (conducted by bodies such as ATA, ITI, the U.S. government, EU institutions and others) are there for.
[Edited at 2015-08-18 16:55 GMT]
Let me just say, C2 might be defined as a certain language skill/language proficiency, and tests exist and people pass them for all kinds of reasons - but these individuals don't become NATIVE speakers just because they studied the language as adults for 4 years, 17 hours a week and then passed the C2 test. And C2 level is not considered to be equivalent to native language. I think we can agree on that. Aren't there even sub-levels of C2?
It's okay if you do a test translation directly for the EU, if that's a good job prospect. And if you do fantastically, more power to anyone, and I hope it pays off working for the EU. I hope that's all they test you on, your ability to translate from one language into another language. I wouldn't submit to anything else. Now you are talking about working directly with the EU for more money?? Not for a translation agency that used your CV and test translation to win a bid and then works with you only because you are cheap enough?!
Regarding individuals losing their native language skills: it can happen to a degree but it can most likely be regained over time. If the individuals you mentioned having lived for more than 20 years in a (for them) non-native environment would move back or even just get sufficiently exposed again to their native language, they can regain the "words/phrases" they can't think of anymore. Best of course back home. But their basic native-language mind set/language set up can't be erased, not if they grew up with a language from childhood. They weren't translators before they applied at the EU right? And they hadn't used their native language at all for a long time, right? So they might seem to have lost their skills, but they are just dormant as far as using that language within their native language environment goes. Now, even if they regain their skills in their native language environment and use them as other native speakers do there, they don't become translators just because they are native speakers of one language and also learned another language or spoke it in Australia and New Zealand.
Translators work with words, professionally. That's a whole other level than people in other professions. On that level, the professional translator level, it's all about the text, yes, but ... . I am not saying that any native speaker who speaks a second language is a natural translator. Far from it. But I am not ready to accept that any non-native speaker of X who passes a C2 exam is more likely to provide a better translation into X than the native speaker of X, all other things (fields of expertise, skill set in the second/source language for comprehension purposes, .... ) being equal. Every serious translator's success depends on a formidable command of the source language as well, that goes without saying. But it's harder to actually translate into and write in the target language as a non-native translator - arriving at an excellent text - than it is to "simply" have to read/understand the source text (be it in your non-native or native language) - and let's never forget I am talking about professional translators, not someone who has never worked as a translator before.
So let them test away, that's fine. It doesn't kill the concept of native language AFAIC and it doesn't make me accept anyone as native speaker per se. Now I understand native speakers also take that exam to get jobs at the EU? What does the exam contain and why do you think a professional translator and native speaker of the target text wouldn't perform better than a non-native? Or am I to understand that the test isn't that hard? Not sure about the current quality of translations of EU texts. In any case, from having read various examples I can say that a translator's output in his/her non-native language is most often clearly non-native - in terms of meaning, grammar, and style.
To me, it's highly unlikely that the non-native translator of the target language comes up with a better translation than the native one, among professional translators that is. Now things like TMs and set phrases and terms used in the EU can help a non-native achieve good results, don't get me wrong. But overall, there isn't equality between natives of X and non-natives who learned X as a second language in school (in a non-native environment) or later, as adults, no matter where they learned it. Translators with exceptional non-native skills exist, yes, but they are the exception. And they are nevertheless non-natives. Agreed?
Can we agree on the concept of native speaker versus non-native speaker? If so, it seems to be ONE of the justifiable criteria by which clients might choose a particular PROFESSIONAL TRANSLATOR. Maybe sometimes that criterion is less important (in exceptional cases).
[Edited at 2015-08-19 03:24 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Inga Petkelyte 
Portugal
Local time: 01:35
Lithuanian to Portuguese
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Looking wider | Aug 19, 2015 |
Maria, thank you for the wisdom, objectivity and the tip, all was highly appreciated.
Bernhard...
My mother tongue is my native language and such will be forever. And please, stay within the context. As I have already explained in one of the earlier threads, there is no possibility on ProZ to indicate "nearly native/dominant/proficiency" - it is either "nateive" or "working" language. Now, the difference in the levels of those working languages often is pretty significant: are... See more Maria, thank you for the wisdom, objectivity and the tip, all was highly appreciated.
Bernhard...
My mother tongue is my native language and such will be forever. And please, stay within the context. As I have already explained in one of the earlier threads, there is no possibility on ProZ to indicate "nearly native/dominant/proficiency" - it is either "nateive" or "working" language. Now, the difference in the levels of those working languages often is pretty significant: areas of expertise might vary, the level of proficiency may be different, among other factors.
To my belief, strong and serious evidence has been provided by various commenters on behalf of non-natives. Then this makes me wonder:
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
To me, it's highly unlikely that the non-native translator of the target language comes up with a better translation than the native one, among professional translators that is.
How much of real experience do you have on this? Why not trust experience of other translators sometimes?
Just a quick exercise: in your opinion, how many native English speakers, or professional translators, for that matter, would promptly know the exact meaning and usage of murder, homicide and manslaughter? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Inga Petkelyte
Portugal
Local time: 01:35
Lithuanian to Portuguese
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Some time ago already -and I wonder whther this post will survive, for a related post was banned at the time - there was a Kudo question at the Pro level asked by a native professional translator, clearly more eligible than me: how is Legal Department in her native language (not native for me).
I got so much ashamed, personally, about the mere fact of such question, I just unsubscribed from KudoZ and have never looked back.
For clarity sake: it was not one occasionally "lost" questi... See more Some time ago already -and I wonder whther this post will survive, for a related post was banned at the time - there was a Kudo question at the Pro level asked by a native professional translator, clearly more eligible than me: how is Legal Department in her native language (not native for me).
I got so much ashamed, personally, about the mere fact of such question, I just unsubscribed from KudoZ and have never looked back.
For clarity sake: it was not one occasionally "lost" question, it was one of number of others of the same kind. This particular one happened to turn into the last drop for me. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Non-native speakers of X translating perfectly into X are still the exception, not the rule | Aug 19, 2015 |
Inga Petkelyte wrote:
Maria, thank you for the wisdom, objectivity and the tip, all was highly appreciated.
Bernhard...
My mother tongue is my native language and such will be forever. And please, stay within the context. As I have already explained in one of the earlier threads, there is no possibility on ProZ to indicate "nearly native/dominant/proficiency" - it is either "nateive" or "working" language. Now, the difference in the levels of those working languages often is pretty significant: areas of expertise might vary, the level of proficiency may be different, among other factors.
"Nearly native/dominant/proficiency" isn't what clients are looking for if they want "native" speakers. There are very good reasons - mostly - to want to get a native speaker of the target language who is also a professional translator. It's up to you to convince some clients that you as a non-native speaker of X and professional translator will do an excellent job translating into X.
Are you worried about losing jobs to native speakers here on this portal? Don't be.
Inga Petkelyte wrote:
To my belief, strong and serious evidence has been provided by various commenters on behalf of non-natives.
Evidence? That non-natives are "in general" just as good as natives of X translating into X? I don't see that evidence. The opposite is really more likely.
Inga Petkelyte wrote: Then this makes me wonder: Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
To me, it's highly unlikely that the non-native translator of the target language comes up with a better translation than the native one, among professional translators that is. How much of real experience do you have on this? Why not trust experience of other translators sometimes? Just a quick exercise: in your opinion, how many native English speakers, or professional translators, for that matter, would promptly know the exact meaning and usage of murder, homicide and manslaughter?
I am a professional translator and I've been doing this for quite a while. My English is also pretty good - well it needs to be. But I can tell you from my own honest experience that it takes a lot of years and experience to even think that you are anywhere close to what a native speaker of and translator into English can do. The more you get to know a language and culture, the more you realize how much more there is to learn, especially with regard to the language, especially when you use it as your bread and butter.
To answer your question: a professional translator will have no problem distinguishing the terms. Doesn't matter if he is native or non-native in English, as long as English is one of his/her working languages. But that's not what distinguishes a native English speaker and translator from a non-native English speaker and translator. The difference lies with the overall use of the written word in the larger context.
Non-native speakers of X translating perfectly into X are still the exception, not the rule.
[Edited at 2015-08-19 13:33 GMT]
| | | | | Rules x laws | Aug 19, 2015 |
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Non-native speakers of X translating perfectly into X are still the exception, not the rule.
Now and then there is an exception that proves a rule.
A law will admit no exceptions, unless such exceptions are either listed therewithin, or included in a later amendment.
As it has been shown here, some translation agencies have turned the native-speaker rule into their law, actually a by-law, derived from the Law of Least Effort, being ready and willing to face the consequences of the latter, if any.
Summer at Proz is war time, people fighting to convert the native-rule into a law. As long as there are exceptions, it shall remain a rule.
While everyone must obey the laws applicable to them, adopting a rule is optional. The key to end these wars is in letting each individual or organization exercise their rightful option.
It's like a (careless) job post I saw here; they wanted EN > PT translators who MUST be native speakers of CN. I'm automatically out! I don't match their requirements, period. No point in convincing them otherwise.
On the other hand, some authors ask me to translate their books from PT into EN-US. I offer to put them in direct contact with some competent American colleague. It beats me why, but most don't want it! No point either.
The party holding the cash is entitled to their choice.
| | |
|
|
|
To quote your statement : "Non-native speakers of X translating perfectly into X are still the exception, not the rule."
Has anyone on this thread said the reverse?
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 06:05
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Are agencies/researchers reading this thread? | Aug 19, 2015 |
This, and the other summer eruptions on this topic, would really serve their purpose only if it motivates agencies to take a relook on their translator selection procedures.
In all these threads they can find enough sound reasons why the native speaker rule they are currently following may not be in their best interests.
It would be interesting to the community if they could report here on any changes they have initiated in this direction along with reasons. It will be ... See more This, and the other summer eruptions on this topic, would really serve their purpose only if it motivates agencies to take a relook on their translator selection procedures.
In all these threads they can find enough sound reasons why the native speaker rule they are currently following may not be in their best interests.
It would be interesting to the community if they could report here on any changes they have initiated in this direction along with reasons. It will be equally interesting to know why they haven't or won't.
Also, are language departments in universities, language professors, and research scholars reading these threads?
Not much research has been done on translation per se, and much of the confusion here is on account of this. What research has been done, has been on monolingual people. So there is enough ideas and material for new topics for college projects, phds, and scholarly books. These new research will benefit the translation profession.
What is urgently needed is an easy-to-apply metric for evaluating translator proficiency that agencies can adopt in place of the current superstitionous native language rule. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Inga Petkelyte
Portugal
Local time: 01:35
Lithuanian to Portuguese
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
To answer your question: a professional translator will have no problem distinguishing the terms.
On what grounds are you stating this, Bernhard? On your personal conviction, perhaps, again?
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Doesn't matter if he is native or non-native in English, as long as English is one of his/her working languages.
And if that doesn't matter, why does this issue exist at all?
| | | | |
|
|
|
| Selection approach based on equal opportunities | Aug 19, 2015 |
The competitions for permanent staff in-house translators organized by the EU institutions are set up in two steps. Step 1 provides for target language command at the level of C2 of the Common European Framework of References for Languages. Here, target language command is based on self-assessment. The description of the writing skills required reads as follows:
"I can write clear, smoothly-flowing text in an appropriate style. I can write complex letters, reports or articles which presen... See more The competitions for permanent staff in-house translators organized by the EU institutions are set up in two steps. Step 1 provides for target language command at the level of C2 of the Common European Framework of References for Languages. Here, target language command is based on self-assessment. The description of the writing skills required reads as follows:
"I can write clear, smoothly-flowing text in an appropriate style. I can write complex letters, reports or articles which present a case with an effective logical structure which helps the recipient to notice and remember significant points. I can write summaries and reviews of professional or literary works."
If a translator thinks he/she complies with this requirement he/she can take part in the tests. The tests involve translations from two source languages into the relevant target language. These translations are then evaluated either by university professors of the relevant target language or by senior staff translators according to a points system. The best translators will then receive job offers to work in Brussels or Luxemburg.
At no point during this selection procedure does the concept of "native language" come into play. This approach allows equal opportunities for all translators who have native-level proficiency in a language X.
Although I don't know the rationale behind ATA's and ITI's choices of terminology ("dominant language"/"language of habitual use") I would imagine that it is precisely for the same underlying reason of providing equal opportunities for all translators with native level proficiency regardless of their origin that they chose these terms. In my interpretation, as long as ProZ uses a single term "native language" this has to be interpreted in a non-restrictive sense as encompassing native level proficiency, dominant language, language of habitual use, main language etc.
It is quite futile to continue this discussion because the advocates of a restrictive interpretation of the term and those of a non-restrictive interpretation will never reach consensus, the underlying issue being one of market shares fought over by competitors for scarce translation work.
[Edited at 2015-08-19 17:33 GMT]
[Edited at 2015-08-19 22:20 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 17:35
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Non-native speakers of X translating perfectly into X are still the exception, not the rule
Too many translators mistakenly believe they are one of the exceptions. Agencies and end clients see the results and then insist on real natives. Non-natives feel they are being treated unfairly.
| | | | | Context matters | Aug 19, 2015 |
Inga Petkelyte wrote: Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
To answer your question: a professional translator will have no problem distinguishing the terms. On what grounds are you stating this, Bernhard? On your personal conviction, perhaps, again?
No, based on my experience as a professional translator and English being my non-native language.
Inga Petkelyte wrote: Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
Doesn't matter if he is native or non-native in English, as long as English is one of his/her working languages. And if that doesn't matter, why does this issue exist at all?
Please don't quote me out of context. Thx.
(edited)
[Edited at 2015-08-19 17:50 GMT]
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » From bad to worse... An advice? Native vs Non-native issue | 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! » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
