| Страниц в теме: < [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
|
|---|
| | Balasubramaniam L. 
Индия
Local time: 07:01
Член ProZ.com c 2006
английский => хинди
+ ...
ЛОКАЛИЗАТОР САЙТА | The nation states of Europe and universal education have done in many European languages | Jul 26, 2013 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
No shortage of languages in Europe
LilianBNekipelo wrote:
certain regions in the world are characterized by a real abundance of languages, and many of their inhabitants are multilingual
Just like Europe.
Not at all.
The perennially warring nation-states of Europe sharpened national and linguistic identities and a sense of purity in these characteristics in the minds of their citizens, which was taken one step too far by people like Hitler. This discouraged people from learning or using other people's languages, especially if it was an enemy state's language. The linguistic pride of French people and the disdain they have for English are quite well known.
Another important factor that decimated the languages of Europe was universal and standardized education. By forcing all children to learn the same standardized version of the state's language, these states killed off much of the linguistic and dialectical diversity present in the European languages.
It is only recently after the formation of the EU and with borders opening up between the nation states that a favourable environment for the intermingling of languages is developing in Europe. May be, if these conditions prevail for a substantial amount of time, say 50 years or 100 years, then Europe too would move towards the kind of linguistic diversity that one can see in places like India, South Africa or Russia.
Some people here found it objectionable to be told that Europeans and Americans don't and cannot understand what multilingualism is, having not experienced it. Yet, from the comments of Ty et al, it is clear that I was not off the mark at all, and even a translation professional like Ty understands little of what multilingualism really entails in places like India.
In India, multilingualism exists at two important levels, which can be characterized as intra and inter lingual multilingualism. Each language has several dialects of which only one is usually accepted as the standard version and is used for all official and prestigious purposes. Yet people, including educated people, speak more than one dialect of their language in addition to the standard version. This constitutes one level of linguistic diversity. It is this diversity that has been largely extirpated in Europe by universal education in the standard version of the language. It may still exist in some parts of Europe where universal education was recently achieved, but in most of the larger nation-states, much of the dialectical linguistic diversity has already been lost.
The second level of multilingualism found in India is the inter-lingual multilingualism, that is people knowing two major languages. Often this entails knowing more than one dialect of each of these languages. Thus a person knowing Hindi and Marathi, not just knows these two languages, but might also be knowing two or three dialects of Hindi and the same number of dialects of Marathi. This in effect would mean knowing six of seven languages, not just two.
In contrast, when a European knows two languages, say French or English, he only knows two languages, the standard version of French and the standard version of English, because the dialectical diversity in these languages has already been lost as a result of universalisation of education.
This is why I say mulitilingualism in places like India is of a different order altogether, and cannot be compared to the rudimentary multilingualism one can find in cities like London.
I have less hopes for the US which will continue to be predominantly monolingual for as long as I can see with its citizens knowing at the most English and may be one additional language.
[Edited at 2013-07-26 12:33 GMT]
| | | | | If they are official, officers must speak them | Jul 26, 2013 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
Ever heard of Switzerland?
LilianBNekipelo wrote:
where people speak at least three languages from their early childhood?
[Edited at 2013-07-26 09:18 GMT]
It's a nice country. Official languages: German, French, Italian, and Romansh.
This happened years ago, and I believed it. Though I don't translate French nor Italian, I communicate in both sufficiently well to get by as a tourist.
So I drove from Milano to Zürich. As long as the road signs said "Zurigo", I could communicate in Italian without a hitch. As soon as I went past the first sign labeled "Zürich", I could only get "Nur Deutsch!" responses to my attempts to communicate in EN-PT-IT-FR-ES-PL. My ex-wife's tries in PT-EN-HE-RO had the same result.
I quickly learned the setup. Few bilinguals there. Clerks in banks spoke all languages fluently. Every department store had one elderly woman, usually a sales clerk, who spoke IT. In restaurants, most waiters spoke IT, if not, an assistant chef would speak FR.
I've met some Canadians in Toronto who only spoke FR. Likewise, I met some others living in Montreal who only spoke EN. No idea on how they get by at work.
| | | | | I don't have a problem with it... | Jul 26, 2013 |
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Let's judge people on the basis of their work.
Having said that, the real problem to me is that people who can write competently in their second language are very few and far between. So, by not encouraging people to stick to their native language (whatever that is), we encourage the proliferation of incompetent people who think they can write in a foreign language. This the problem with encouraging the exception. So, freedom in this case ... See more The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Let's judge people on the basis of their work.
Having said that, the real problem to me is that people who can write competently in their second language are very few and far between. So, by not encouraging people to stick to their native language (whatever that is), we encourage the proliferation of incompetent people who think they can write in a foreign language. This the problem with encouraging the exception. So, freedom in this case might lead to the bastardisation of a language. ▲ Collapse
| | | | XXXphxxx (X)
Великобритания
Local time: 01:31
португальский => английский
+ ...
| The crux of the problem? | Jul 26, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
But the native-only refrain goes against this fact, which is why it is inimical to our profession. There are two main ways in which it does harm:
1. It emboldens natives with poor writing skills and poor understanding or knowledge of translation to set up shop taking advantage of the false prestige we bestow on the native-only theory. With the result that we get an avalanche of poorly done translation which brings disrepute on our profession.
2. It excludes competent non-native translation professionals from doing these jobs, which then often goes to incompetent native translators, with the result that translation quality suffers, again bringing disrepute to our profession.
The solution is clearly to look for proficiency in translation and language skills and not for fibs like native language status.
So, as I understand it, you want to be able to translate from Hindi (your native language) into English (your non-native language), but the constraints of this site and virtually the entire translation industry mean that you are unable to do so? Following your logic, do we therefore assume that you do not currently undertake any translations from any of your non-native languages into Hindi because that would produce chronically sub-standard work? Or are you not counting yourself amongst the “natives” producing “an avalanche of poorly done translation”?
| | |
|
|
|
| If you speak English only, and live in Quebeck, where some T-shirts | Jul 26, 2013 |
read -- French only, you open a business online and deal only with the English-speaking clientele, order food online using Google translate -- although sometimes you may get a totally different order from what you have ordered. You don't go to regular work I guess, or perhaps only if you have the type of job where extra verbal communication is enough.
Another thing , from a different barrel -- do you know Lisa, a lot of people who grew up in England, on non-Indian descent who... See more read -- French only, you open a business online and deal only with the English-speaking clientele, order food online using Google translate -- although sometimes you may get a totally different order from what you have ordered. You don't go to regular work I guess, or perhaps only if you have the type of job where extra verbal communication is enough.
Another thing , from a different barrel -- do you know Lisa, a lot of people who grew up in England, on non-Indian descent who can translate complex documents into Hindi? I doubt there are too many of them -- maybe a few Oxford professors. As to the so called "native language"of the people of multicultural backgrounds, living in different countries -- I don't believe anyone's L1 is totally "native" after having lived in another country for 20 years or more.
[Edited at 2013-07-26 12:47 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
But the native-only refrain goes against this fact, which is why it is inimical to our profession. There are two main ways in which it does harm:
1. It emboldens natives with poor writing skills and poor understanding or knowledge of translation to set up shop taking advantage of the false prestige we bestow on the native-only theory. With the result that we get an avalanche of poorly done translation which brings disrepute on our profession.
2. It excludes competent non-native translation professionals from doing these jobs, which then often goes to incompetent native translators, with the result that translation quality suffers, again bringing disrepute to our profession.
The solution is clearly to look for proficiency in translation and language skills and not for fibs like native language status.
So, as I understand it, you want to be able to translate from Hindi (your native language) into English (your non-native language), but the constraints of this site and virtually the entire translation industry mean that you are unable to do so? Following your logic, do we therefore assume that you do not currently undertake any translations from any of your non-native languages into Hindi because that would produce chronically sub-standard work? Or are you not counting yourself amongst the “natives” producing “an avalanche of poorly done translation”?
where's the Like button, Lisa? Nothing against B., but this made me chuckle... 
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
Индия
Local time: 07:01
Член ProZ.com c 2006
английский => хинди
+ ...
ЛОКАЛИЗАТОР САЙТА | I am not talking about myself here, but general issues | Jul 26, 2013 |
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
But the native-only refrain goes against this fact, which is why it is inimical to our profession. There are two main ways in which it does harm:
1. It emboldens natives with poor writing skills and poor understanding or knowledge of translation to set up shop taking advantage of the false prestige we bestow on the native-only theory. With the result that we get an avalanche of poorly done translation which brings disrepute on our profession.
2. It excludes competent non-native translation professionals from doing these jobs, which then often goes to incompetent native translators, with the result that translation quality suffers, again bringing disrepute to our profession.
The solution is clearly to look for proficiency in translation and language skills and not for fibs like native language status.
So, as I understand it, you want to be able to translate from Hindi (your native language) into English (your non-native language), but the constraints of this site and virtually the entire translation industry mean that you are unable to do so? Following your logic, do we therefore assume that you do not currently undertake any translations from any of your non-native languages into Hindi because that would produce chronically sub-standard work? Or are you not counting yourself amongst the “natives” producing “an avalanche of poorly done translation”?
Lisa, your questions are completely irrelevant. I am not talking about myself here, but on general issues. So none of these questions merit any answer.
[Edited at 2013-07-26 13:10 GMT]
| | | | Ty Kendall
Великобритания
Local time: 01:31
иврит => английский
| Let me get this straight.... | Jul 26, 2013 |
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
In contrast, when a European knows two languages, say French or English, he only knows two languages, the standard version of French and the standard version of English, because the dialectical diversity in these languages has already been lost as a result of universalisation of education.
You think Europe lacks dialects? Every nation language is used in only one dialect? Correct?
| | |
|
|
|
| Yes, I am a little surprised that some people only consider someone's post in terms of financial | Jul 26, 2013 |
gain or lack thereof. What about ideas? Discussing things for the sole purpose of discussing them, and discovering more objective facts, perhaps, than certain cliches. I have no financial interest whatsoever in Indian translation, or anything else I have been discussing. The only problem I sometimes encounter are ridiculous rates and too short deadline. I found this subject fascinating, however, and I feel like there is a lot of injustice in certain generalizations.
[Edited at 2013-07... See more gain or lack thereof. What about ideas? Discussing things for the sole purpose of discussing them, and discovering more objective facts, perhaps, than certain cliches. I have no financial interest whatsoever in Indian translation, or anything else I have been discussing. The only problem I sometimes encounter are ridiculous rates and too short deadline. I found this subject fascinating, however, and I feel like there is a lot of injustice in certain generalizations.
[Edited at 2013-07-26 13:08 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Lincoln Hui
Гонконг
Local time: 09:31
Член ProZ.com
китайский => английский
+ ...
| When a fair number of translators are calling test translations "unprofessional"... | Jul 26, 2013 |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Let's judge people on the basis of their work.
Having said that, the real problem to me is that people who can write competently in their second language are very few and far between. So, by not encouraging people to stick to their native language (whatever that is), we encourage the proliferation of incompetent people who think they can write in a foreign language. This the problem with encouraging the exception. So, freedom in this case might lead to the bastardisation of a language.
"300 page book on Chinese medicine to be translated from Chinese to English. Applicants must have excellent knowledge of traditional Chinese medicine. Mother tongue must be English."
Hypothetical, but perfectly possible. Good luck with that.
| | | | Ty Kendall
Великобритания
Local time: 01:31
иврит => английский
LilianBNekipelo wrote:
It is the ethnicity point in Wikipedia, Ty, just in case you did not know where this restriction falls)
[Edited at 2013-07-26 12:21 GMT]
"With American society growing more diverse, employers have increasingly required that some employees be fluent in languages other than English. For example, a business that provides services to Spanish-speaking customers might have a sound business reason for requiring that some of its employees speak Spanish. As with English fluency requirements, requirements for fluency in foreign languages must actually be necessary for the positions for which they are imposed."
http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/national-origin.html
What you need to bear in mind is that:
a) these rules apply to the employer/employee relationship, which by and large, does not apply to us.
b) "be necessary for the position for which they are imposed" - I'd say translation is a profession where a language stipulation is pretty necessary.
Also:
anti-discrimination laws prevent employers, absent a recognized business necessity, , from basing employment decisions on English proficiency
http://www.fvldlaw.com/?t=40&an=916&format=xml
Please pay attention to the bold, underlined bit.
[Edited at 2013-07-26 13:09 GMT]
| | | | | How do you know that, Ty? | Jul 26, 2013 |
The federal law is the feral law, and there is no use guessing what some companies may need versus what they may not need. Of course they can administer their own language tests, if they need -- as to the level of proficiency, not any nativeness. Some companies may need just redheads -- so what?
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
Великобритания
Local time: 01:31
иврит => английский
| Because the law is a matter of public record.... | Jul 26, 2013 |
LilianBNekipelo wrote:
The federal law is the feral [sic] law
Oh my.
| | | |
Lincoln Hui wrote:
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Let's judge people on the basis of their work.
Having said that, the real problem to me is that people who can write competently in their second language are very few and far between. So, by not encouraging people to stick to their native language (whatever that is), we encourage the proliferation of incompetent people who think they can write in a foreign language. This the problem with encouraging the exception. So, freedom in this case might lead to the bastardisation of a language.
"300 page book on Chinese medicine to be translated from Chinese to English. Applicants must have excellent knowledge of traditional Chinese medicine. Mother tongue must be English."
Hypothetical, but perfectly possible. Good luck with that.
I'm sure there are lots of English native translators in China who lived there long enough, are knowledgeable and can be paired with a Chinese colleague.
| | | | | Swabian is one of many German dialects | Jul 26, 2013 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
Balasubramaniam L. wrote:
In contrast, when a European knows two languages, say French or English, he only knows two languages, the standard version of French and the standard version of English, because the dialectical diversity in these languages has already been lost as a result of universalisation of education.
You think Europe lacks dialects? Every nation language is used in only one dialect? Correct?
Dubbed in Swabian Dialect: funny video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmHBSlyumkE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swabian_German
| | | | | Страниц в теме: < [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! » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
