| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] > | On the importance/requirement of being native speaker Thread poster: Pia Kurro
|
|---|
Pia Kurro 
Estonia
Local time: 14:51
English to Estonian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Increased efficiency, market share, challenge... | Jul 6, 2009 |
Oh, I did not know the topic is so popular... Never encountered those discussions myself. So, if it bores you, simply do not read. Sorry!
Most participants here come from major language groups - English, German, French... I am sure there is no deficit of target language native speakers in those, so why would one indeed go compete with the French in translating into French. The more so if the price is the same. But the... See more Oh, I did not know the topic is so popular... Never encountered those discussions myself. So, if it bores you, simply do not read. Sorry!
Most participants here come from major language groups - English, German, French... I am sure there is no deficit of target language native speakers in those, so why would one indeed go compete with the French in translating into French. The more so if the price is the same. But there are also small languages, and there are lower price regions.
Firstly, as my Finnish colleague put it - who would translate from [so many languages] into English, decently, if not the natives themselves? Are the Chinese-English and Japanese-English translators, by the way, prevailingly English or prevailingy Chinese and Japanese?
Now, if you already do a lot of translations into English (or some other language) from your mother tongue, it is quite as easy to start translating from a second, third, fourth... language into English, as long as your understanding in those is good enough. Because translators in the "old" Europe countries command up to 4 times higher prices (as you all probably do) than me, for example, it leaves a nice margin that me and my client can share.. Thus, in difference from the colleagues translating only between the similarly priced "old" languages, I use my time more efficiently businesswise, if translate from a non-native into a non-native, higher-paying language. I earn more per word, even though it does take somewhat more time.
I can also increase my market by sneaking away work from e.g. my Finnish or Swedish colleagues (most sorry, but - business is business! ugh? ).
And thirdly- it is simply more challenging! Doesn't it get boring and monotonous if you translate for years and years and tens of years? I can stretch my mind again, to get the meaning right and to get it correctly conveyed. While simultaneously I am improving all the time in both languages that are not my own.
So, about reaching for the stars... please do, but please also allow others do it!
Why would the clients go for such translations? Perhaps, (occasionally) because the quality is better than or similar to that of their own countryman who otherwise would do the translation. We are both non-natives in the target language and I am better in that non-native target language! (as an example, this situation being entirely hypothetical!.
But more often because they want to save costs on something huge but not overly important, or also because a native translation is not practicable or is irrelevant, or -- them being non-natives themselves -- they could not care less. Like, for example, a somewhat multinational company that operates in non-English countries, but uses English for intra-company communications. They might need translations of lengthy work documents or project materials, written and also read exclusively by non-natives. You have it translated by a native speaker and it may happen no one will even understand. And it will be costly! though it all ends up in a wastebin the moment after everyone has read it...
Among my own clients have been a few banks who needed such intra-company work documents; a construction company requiring translations into languages of its two countries of operation, and into English for official purposes -- it is more safe then that one and the same person does all those, to secure the homogeneity of translations; a private person doing his Master's degree in an English-speaking university, who was good at his main subject but less eloquent in English; and a few persons who wanted to publish a book or other work in English and the cost of using a native speaker translator would have rendered it impossible. All were duly informed of the associated risks, but they still found it an acceptable solution.
On "Translation is not a career for the untalented. We must all be talented.", sorry but this is wishful thinking, Mr Dewsbery. Just look around who all are translating! The other day I encountered a "native" spelling "proffesional" in his Proz.com profile right here! Another "native" from Canada I think was completely unintelligible (deciding by his name and the languages he was working in, though, perhaps a not overly talented 1st or 2nd generation immigrant that one).
Etc. ... ▲ Collapse
| | | | Williamson
United Kingdom
Local time: 12:51
Flemish to English
+ ...
Jocelyne S wrote:
We've been through this endless times before and I imagine that the issue will never really be put to rest, but personally I don't understand why someone would take the added time needed to translate into their second (or third, etc.) language.
Because translating both ways is required to get a degree in Translation (for those who do not think that it is superfluous course of study),
because some government agencies of multilingual countries don't have a budget as big as the E.U.-budget and therefore if a person wants to become a translator at a ministry or a government institution one of the job requirements is to be able to translate from say Dutch into French, English and/or German , because some translators prefer an employee job and if companies can cut costs by having one translator translate in a number of languages, they will not hesitate to hire that person.
Because some translators grew up in bilingual/multilingual countries with the other language living in their homes (husbands/wifes) or their target language is the language next door. Because if you are forced to translate in both directions, you are obliged to weigh your words and your cognitive knowledge of that other language enhances ... I can understand why natives of English defend translation into their native tongue. If everybody speaks English to you, you are never forced to use the other language actively.
Because some translators have lived in another country for a very long time.
Because the end-client does not give a damn.
[Bijgewerkt op 2009-07-06 14:37 GMT]
| | | | RobinB
United States
Local time: 06:51
German to English
| Actually, it doesn't matter *who* you are... | Jul 6, 2009 |
the only thing that really counts is the impeccable quality of your translations.
Clients (meaning end-clients) aren't bothered in the slightest about the translator's attributes - gender, nationality, (original) native language, ethnic origin, or even species - as long as the end product, meaning your translation, is exactly what they've paid for.
Let's leave aside those relatively small markets where simple economics mean that many translators have to translate into t... See more the only thing that really counts is the impeccable quality of your translations.
Clients (meaning end-clients) aren't bothered in the slightest about the translator's attributes - gender, nationality, (original) native language, ethnic origin, or even species - as long as the end product, meaning your translation, is exactly what they've paid for.
Let's leave aside those relatively small markets where simple economics mean that many translators have to translate into their foreign language(s) simply to make a living. For major languages, where premium translations are concerned, the translation must have the look and feel of a text written by an educated writer who's in, say, the top 2% of the relevant language population as far as knowledge of the language and writing ability are concerned, and who has a very deep and current knowledge of the subject area in question.
Of course, that knocks out most "native speaker" translators at the first post, because sadly far too many of them (and not just the English native speakers) are pretty miserable writers and have little or no subject area knowledge. Simply having one of the requires skills is not enough: a translator has to have them all, in spades.
Equally, nobody cares how you *speak* the language: you can speak English like Dr. Strangelove, and it won't bother anybody in the slightest. What's important is that you don't *write* English like Dr. Strangelove!
To sum up: the benchmark is very high, and applies equally to natives and non-natives. If a technically non-native translator can produce exactly the same high level of translation quality as a top-flight native colleague, then nobody (no client and no honest native colleague) is going have anything other than praise for the quality of the work.
Unfortunately, though, experience shows that (far too) many non-native translators (and not just into English) overestimate their abilities and kid themselves that, because they can, indeed, write reasonably good English, that puts them somehow on a par with the top native translators. It's axiomatic that "reasonablly good" is never good enough in translation, irrespective of whether you're a native, and whether or not you have a translation degree or decades of subject area experience: in the real world, 90% is a Fail. And, in my experience, unfortunately most translations fail. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Edward Vreeburg
Netherlands
Local time: 13:51
Member (2008)
English to Dutch
+ ...
| native matters! | Jul 6, 2009 |
Very simple example:
In the Netherlands "we" speak Dutch.
In Belgium they also speak Dutch (often referred to "Flemish")
The language used is 99% identical.
Still I (and probabaly about half the pupulation) can immediately see when a Dutch text is written by a native Dutch person, or somebody from Belgium, based on a few words in the text.
This might not be an actual problem in itself, but now take the same person and put him in a different country for 30 yea... See more Very simple example:
In the Netherlands "we" speak Dutch.
In Belgium they also speak Dutch (often referred to "Flemish")
The language used is 99% identical.
Still I (and probabaly about half the pupulation) can immediately see when a Dutch text is written by a native Dutch person, or somebody from Belgium, based on a few words in the text.
This might not be an actual problem in itself, but now take the same person and put him in a different country for 30 years, unless they keep reading the newspapers and talk with a lot of different people from their native country they probably wouldn't know what the latest new words and expressions are
A none native mught translate "meer blauw op straat" with "more blue on the streets", instead of "more police out on patrol"...
(this is a bad example, because of the mother tongue principle a Dutch person should not be translating into English... but you get the idea...
Ed ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Anne Brackenborough (X)
Germany
Local time: 13:51
German to English
| Some clients do prefer native speakers | Jul 6, 2009 |
RobinB wrote:
Clients (meaning end-clients) aren't bothered in the slightest about the translator's attributes - gender, nationality, (original) native language, ethnic origin, or even species - as long as the end product, meaning your translation, is exactly what they've paid for.
The problem is that most end clients are not able to judge the quality of the translation. That's one reason why some clients do prefer native speakers, as they hope that the quality of the translation might be better if they cut out the translators who are more likely to make non-native mistakes. By doing so they may well be cutting out a large number of talented non-native translators - choosing only native speakers is a blunt instrument - but it is their attempt to make some sort of quality control using the limited tools they have, and it is effective to the extent that it at least cuts out the untalented non-natives, who, as I said, will be worse than the untalented native speakers!
| | | | Williamson
United Kingdom
Local time: 12:51
Flemish to English
+ ...
pupulation....
Native only: boring so boring.
| | | | | At the risk of sounding boring to some ... | Jul 6, 2009 |
RobinB wrote:
To sum up: the benchmark is very high, and applies equally to natives and non-natives. If a technically non-native translator can produce exactly the same high level of translation quality as a top-flight native colleague, then nobody (no client and no honest native colleague) is going have anything other than praise for the quality of the work.
... this sums it up nicely.
| | | | Anne Brackenborough (X)
Germany
Local time: 13:51
German to English
| Common argument | Jul 6, 2009 |
Williamson wrote:
pupulation....
Native only: boring so boring.
I take it you mean that you are bored of hearing the native-only argument? I guess that's because you live in the UK, where people think you should translate one way only (for the practical reasons I explained above). If you lived, like me, in Germany, you'd probably be bored with the "non-natives are just as good" argument, as that is far more common here (for the other reasons I explained above). I hear it all the time.
What about the idea that both arguments are valid in different contexts?
| | |
|
|
|
| The view from the bottom | Jul 6, 2009 |
RobinB wrote:
... in the real world, 90% is a Fail.
For anything important, I doubt 95% would make the cut. That's the problem with most of the bilinguals who think they can translate. But hey, that's what those nifty 3 cent per word projects are for.
Williamson scribbled:
pupulation....
Native only: boring so boring.
But at least understandable usually and with a bit more care given to spelling Why would I hire someone to translate into English when most of that person's communication in that language is seriously flawed? I did that once for Sinhalese when I was desperate, but never again. And I would certainly never waste my money in language pairs where there are many competent translators available. I know you're fond of citing EU "standards" and practice with regard to translation and language proficiency, but these are, quite frankly, "bog standard".
| | | | Pia Kurro
Estonia
Local time: 14:51
English to Estonian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | The agencies are the main problem | Jul 6, 2009 |
Thanks to everyone, so far...
The way I see it, end clients are not the problem. They are quite often businesses and they weigh the costs and risks etc and make their decision. Colleagues are not a problem either, but agencies are a problem, and government/EU etc. agencies, of course - the bureaucrats whose job task is to receive translations and check their quality, so increased efficiency for them logically means more nitpicking, more regulation, more standardisation. More rules t... See more Thanks to everyone, so far...
The way I see it, end clients are not the problem. They are quite often businesses and they weigh the costs and risks etc and make their decision. Colleagues are not a problem either, but agencies are a problem, and government/EU etc. agencies, of course - the bureaucrats whose job task is to receive translations and check their quality, so increased efficiency for them logically means more nitpicking, more regulation, more standardisation. More rules that leave no room for justified exceptions.
Agencies are those that usually leave out everyone but "native speakers", for reasons not known to me (since they are closer to the "field" and should be better aware of the reality than the clients are). Most of them (if they are serious in their business) employ or use native speaker editors/correctors, for whom it might not be such big difference whether they check the work of a native or of a non-native. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Anne Brackenborough (X)
Germany
Local time: 13:51
German to English
| money, money, money | Jul 6, 2009 |
Pia Kurro wrote:
Agencies are those that usually leave out everyone but "native speakers", for reasons not known to me (since they are closer to the "field" and should be better aware of the reality than the clients are).
A lot of agencies here advertise themselves as only using native speakers, in which case they would look bad if caught using non-native translators.
No doubt they make that claim because it gets them more well-paying work - whether that is for a good reason or because their clients are sadly deluded is irrelevant to them.
| | | | Balasubramaniam L.
India
Local time: 17:21
Member (2006)
English to Hindi
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | It is quality that counts at the end of the day | Jul 6, 2009 |
As others have said, it is quality of the translation that finally matters. If someone can deliver quality, I will have no problems about his nativity.
Having said that, being native in the language that you are translating into, helps a great deal in delivering quality translaiton.
And here is my definition of who a native speaker of a language is:
1. Should have learned it at a very young age (below 10).
2. Should have lived in the milieu of the lan... See more As others have said, it is quality of the translation that finally matters. If someone can deliver quality, I will have no problems about his nativity.
Having said that, being native in the language that you are translating into, helps a great deal in delivering quality translaiton.
And here is my definition of who a native speaker of a language is:
1. Should have learned it at a very young age (below 10).
2. Should have lived in the milieu of the langauge when he/she was young.
3. Should have formal education in the language, its literature and grammar.
A person born into the language (the mother-tonguer) who qualifies on count 1, and not one 2 and 3, will be a worse translator than one who fails on count 1 but passes on counts 2 and 3.
[2009-07-06 16:28 GMT पर संपादन हुआ] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
The Misha
Local time: 07:51
Russian to English
+ ...
| Agencies are entitled to do as they damn please | Jul 6, 2009 |
They are businesses and thus get to decide who they want to hire. That said, do I, as a non-native mostly translating into English, sometimes feel discriminated against? Sure, but that's my problem, not theirs. If I know, in all fairness, that I can do a better job translating into my non-native language than your typical native, it's up to me to prove it to the client, be it an agency or the end user. Hey, we all have our disadvantages, and being a non-native is not the worst of them. Is it ... See more They are businesses and thus get to decide who they want to hire. That said, do I, as a non-native mostly translating into English, sometimes feel discriminated against? Sure, but that's my problem, not theirs. If I know, in all fairness, that I can do a better job translating into my non-native language than your typical native, it's up to me to prove it to the client, be it an agency or the end user. Hey, we all have our disadvantages, and being a non-native is not the worst of them. Is it easy? No. Is it doable? Sure, I've done it before. Coincidentally, one of my major clients is a UK-based agency that keeps coming back again and again for my non-native and not particularly cheap translations into English. I wonder why?
What I think the real problem is is people not being honest with themselves and their clients. There are tons of folks in my pair here that claim to be native speakers of English (yeah, right!), apparently, without realizing how ridiculous their claims sound in light of their lame writings and KudoZ answers at this forum. As was stated by many here, you have to have the goods first. Like, really have them - not just think or pretend that you do. Then, let the buyers decide whether they like what they see.
I may be doing a disservice to myself and a few damn good others I've met on this site, but my personal experience shows that exceptions to the natives only rule mostly confirm the validity of the rule itself.
[Edited at 2009-07-06 17:40 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Rod Walters
Japan
Local time: 20:51
Japanese to English
| Economy of style | Jul 6, 2009 |
Just reading through this thread shows very clearly that non-native writers lack economy of style. In nearly every sentence, they either use too many words to make their point, or too few. Either way, it quickly becomes tiresome to read.
I'm well aware that my written Japanese suffers from the same critical weakness - and anybody who has to read it suffers too.
People everywhere are generally very sensitive about cultural identity and the performance of foreigners with... See more Just reading through this thread shows very clearly that non-native writers lack economy of style. In nearly every sentence, they either use too many words to make their point, or too few. Either way, it quickly becomes tiresome to read.
I'm well aware that my written Japanese suffers from the same critical weakness - and anybody who has to read it suffers too.
People everywhere are generally very sensitive about cultural identity and the performance of foreigners within their culture.
I'm reminded of the scene in Black Rain where the yakuza is boasting to the American cop about Japanese dominance in manufacturing, among other things.
Yakuza: "Everything we do is parfect!"
Cop: (Chuckles) "Perfect..."
However competent non-natives may get, the mistakes of uneducated natives generally seem preferable, especially if the non-native lacks a certain humility ... if one is to be frank.
That's where Japanese manufacturing shoots itself in the foot overseas. In the vast majority of cases, it's documented and marketed by Japanese natives. My parents in the UK just mentioned to me the other day that Japanese product manuals are infamous for being incomprehensible.
Hence the bias towards native speakers. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | 'Natives' in the source language can grasp the meaning of source texts more easily ... | Jul 7, 2009 |
Pia Kurro wrote:
It is a kind of standard demand in many cases that the translator be a native speaker of the target language, or at least of the source language. ...
'Natives' in the source language can grasp the meaning of source texts more easily ...
Hello Pia
In my experience, being a native-speaker in the source language can be very helpful in understanding and 'parsing' the source text, especially, perhaps, 'difficult' texts like legal texts. Being a 'fluent' reader can also help with texts which use 'referents' and 'headings' extensively such as journalistic texts. These are two types of texts that spring to mind.
Being 'educated' helps:
Incidentally, experience in teaching reading and writing skills to ESL students has also been helpful to me personally. However, I do think that good reading skills ought to be transferable to one's second language. An ability to guess, and infer, and use one's background knowledge in translating texts is essential, I would have thought.
Further, Google is a tremendous tool IMO. Being a 'literate' native speaker (in one or other language) can help a lot in 'Googling up' suitable 'terms help'. (There is a huge amount of bilingual material on the Net in Chinese). By 'literate', I mean conversant with and competent in certain types of texts in certain fields. Being 'well-read' in your native language (and curious about things and words) gives you a huge reserve of vocabulary to draw on IMO.
Finally, perhaps 'experience' is as valuable as 'intelligence' and 'aptitude'. It has been said that translators do not reach their peak until around 40 (this was an explanation that I read for the high failure rate for the Naati tests).
Lesley
[Edited at 2009-07-07 03:35 GMT]
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » On the importance/requirement of being native speaker | 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 
Translation news
